Re: SVG SMIL news from Google
Rick <[email protected]> Wed, 17 Aug 2016 16:35:03 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.svg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAGDjS3c3=gB8QE_Ewk2Y3c_r14vf1jm92um8sR=Lx3PEvvjxGA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 3:46 PM, David Dailey <[email protected]> wrote: > This just out from Google (thanks to one of the SVG enthusiasts at Ello > for letting me know). > > > > Excerpt: “We value all of your feedback, and it's clear that there are > use cases serviced by SMIL that just don’t have high-fidelity replacements > yet. As a result, we’ve decided to suspend our intent to deprecate and take > smaller steps toward other options.” > > > > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/ > blink-dev/5o0yiO440LM%5B126-150%5D > > > > Delighted to hear this, Phil and Alex! > I am too, kind of. I have apps that use SMIL. > > I thought that others here might be interested to know. > Yes, thank you David. This takes the pressure off deprecating yet another useful SVG feature although I suppose I'll still have to do it. > > > Now, if as Amelia points out[1], folks can work on convincing places like > FB, Google Plus, Twitter and Wikipedia that SVG in <img> adds value to > their platforms – and is safe--, the web will become a richer place. Am I > correct in concluding from what I read at the links you provided, Amelia, > that SVG in <img> is, as much as anything on the web, safe right now? > > > > Smil(es) > > David > > > > [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2016Aug/0030.html > -- Any coward can sit in his home and criticize a pilot for flying into a mountain in a fog. But I would rather, by far, die on a mountainside than in bed. -- Charles Lindbergh