RE: Back to svg-developers

Hi David,
 

 Good that we have a chance to see that it’s not just the usual big Capitals that are worth a visit. I’m sure I can add some amazing architecture? AND, talking arts and American cultural contribution to arts, when I think of all the Jazz cats that Pittsburg gave to the world! Get this: Paul Chambers, Geri Allen, Erroll Garner, Earl Hines, Henry Mancini, Billy Strayhorn, Art Blakey, Kenny Clarke, Stanley Turrentine, Steve Grossman, Slide Hampton, George Benson, Roy Eldridge, Lena Horne, Eddie Jefferson, Ray Brown, just to name some that probably everyone knows. A Hall of Fame. That kind of thing doesn’t happen by accident, that’s when a city is a boiling pot of culture. Hopefully Pittsburg will output many programmers of that kind of breed.
 

 Back to the main subject, I’m glad you agree about the spirit, but I don’t see where scattering would be the result of blending technologies.
 

 > I think that as SVG has blended with other technologies like CSS and D3, many of its people have scattered. SVG is now everywhere, so many users of it, under the hood, don’t even know it is there.
 

I know you are a very busy man, it’s great that you take the time to write, and sometimes you need to summarize. If you allow me I would put that differently:  CSS and D3 are not technologies, not more than HTML or SVG. CSS is about style sheets–and I find it good that it is being extended–but it is not a programming language, and can never be. To write a program you need a programming language, and in this domain the programming language is JavaScript, period. D3 is a library. HTML and SVG come down to be interfaces (not only graphical), independently of the facilities you use to leverage them (markup languages in the first place, or scripting). They allow to access (instantiation and manipulation) the classes of objects defined for and by the DOM (this is obviously clear for many, and hopefully will be clear for all). The logic of the program is not dependent of the bias (the interfaces).  

 The desire to “blend”, for god knows what design, is the result of obfuscated ideas. The only effect is that of entertaining or creating confusion. Perhaps also to satisfy the increasing demand for Christmas postcards on the net, and “look how easy is to make them with CCS, or with Canvas”. Ah? What? SVG, Canvas, CSS? But the problem is not that; it’s good that anyone can do things (if only that could really expand the artistic capabilities of people!). The problem is, if some find difficult, or are too lazy to learn SVG properly, then they shouldn’t. Nobody forces no one to “design cool stuff” for the web. To cater for the needs of that category of users (really meaning to say people) prioritarily, is to undermine the profession of developer/programmer. I’m sure that many here know other trades, or even come from other trades. Out there, the amateurs play in their own playground, and same for the professionals. In the print trade you don’t even have such a thing as an amateur. Or can you imagine an amateur dentist with amateur tools graciously provided by the W3C? The music industry for example, does not specify or invent a new type of saxophone with less keys saying “OK, this is easier than a regular sax. You can’t do everything but you can at least make some sounds. Go ahead”. When the specification of a musical instrument evolves, it’s after the input from established professionals (not necessarily those who are richer, or have more means or brown noses, no, input from those who can take the shit out of their axe), and even then there’s a tough selection. 
 

 Domenico