Need a few facts on SVG and CSS3
I think SVG had browser support long before CSS3, but someone I'm talking with disagrees. What say all you?
According to Wikipedia:
CSS3 support seems fuzzier, due to its modular approach, such that browsers started supporting some features early on, but even now may not support all features. I suspect you can find some support on some browsers prior to 2004, but it would be your call as to whether any had enough support by that time to count as being before Konqueror started supporting SVG.
Konqueror was the first browser to support SVG in release version 3.2 in February 2004. As of 2011, all major desktop browsers, and many minor ones, have some level of SVG support.
"Please give us a simple answer, so that we don't have to think, because if we think, we might find answers that don't fit the way we want the world to be."
~ Terry Pratchett in Nation
Well, I'm the guy who's disagreeing, but I think he misinterpreted what I was saying; or missed something I said...
Specifically that Adobe made a activeX plugin for IE 5 through 8 that let you use SVG in a OBJECT tag (where it's SUPPOSED to be) -- so that's 2001ish?
Though a lot of CSS3 is just implementing stuff that IE had back then too -- see word-wrap:break-word and webfonts, both of which work back to IE 5.x
I know Opera added support for SVG Tiny sometime around the same time as the hideous 'release party' campaign (the one featuring the bucktoothed homeless lady, surf boy slacker, mob hitman, transexual, etc -- side note, they wonder why they've always been an 'also ran'...) and was one of the first browsers to even try.
I was just surprised to see anyone using it; but I'm also wondering why browser makers are supporting something that it's champion (Adobe) dropped like a hot potato the DAY they bought Macromedia; it's fat, bloated, confusing, slow, inconsistently implemented, inefficient... oh. Ok, so it fits in with HTML/CSS frameworks, JS frameworks, and HTML 5... Gotcha.
I mean, it was a bad idea a decade and a half ago -- why is it continuing to plod on a decade after it's main contributors (M$ and Adobe) declared it dead? I mean if it didn't suck, why would we even have Canvas and CSS3? Particularly since Canvas started at Apple in Safari, which webkit is based on Konqueror's codebase... meaning any SVG support was already there. They already had SVG, and STILL felt the need to create Canvas. That should tell you a lot.
Admittedly, it's at least better than it's predecessors; VML is an outright mess, and PGML makes VML look good.
In a lot of ways it reminds me of the X-Windows API -- where if it didn't so completely suck to the point normal developers don't want to use it Motif, QT, GTK, FLTK, and a whole host of UI interface API's would never have come into being.
Last edited by deathshadow; 06-09-2014 at 09:35 PM.
Well, in my case, it was SVG or Paint--and I felt that SVG allowed me more control over what I was doing.
Then again, I once did an entire webpage with XML+XSLT+Schema+DTD, since I was pissed off with a MySQL server.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)