2. Трезвый взгляд на принятие OOXML из лагеря Linux.
Мне было очень интересно узнать о возможных причинах отказа от SVG.
Then there is the charge about not using SVG in OOXML. There are a few things to point out about SVG.
Referencing SVG would pull virtually every spec that the W3C has produced (Javascript, check; CSS, check; DOM, check).
This can be deceptive in terms of the "size" of the specification, but also makes it incredibly complex to support. To this date am not aware of a complete open source SVG implementation (and Gnome has been at the forefront of trying out SVG, going back to 1999).
But to make things worse, OpenOffice does not support SVG today, and interop in the SVG land leaves a lot to be desired.
Some of my friends that have had to work with SVG have complained extensively to me in the past about it. One friend said "Adobe has completely hijacked it" referring to the bloatedness of SVG and how hard it is to implement it today.
At the time of this comment, Adobe had not yet purchased Macromedia, and it seemed like Adobe was using the standards group and SVG to compete against Flash, making SVG unnecessarily complicated.
Which is why open source applications only support a subset of SVG, a sensible subset.
3. Много-много критики OOXML. В основном здоровой критики. Со многим можно не соглашаться, но по крайней мере не сплошная истерика.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий