You down with SVG?
April 30, 2002 3:09 PM   Subscribe

You down with SVG? (requires SVG plugin) is a proof of concept site contstructed entirely in SVG. [via Webgraphics]
posted by kirkaracha (12 comments total)
Isn't Adobe supposedly winding down SVG development? Flash is too entrenched at this point. (source)
posted by donkeyschlong at 3:11 PM on April 30, 2002

And if that's what it can do, I doubt anyone sees it as a serious threat to flash anyway! Not too bad, but everything is anti-aliased, and seems to take a lot longer to load than similar flash files.
posted by luriete at 3:26 PM on April 30, 2002

yes everything is antialiased, as vector graphics should be.

But the open benefits of SVG tend to be overlooked - like the fact that colours and elements can be controlled via CSS, try doing that with Flash.

but that site is totally shoddy, SVG is not a tool for authoring a complete site.
posted by mook at 3:42 PM on April 30, 2002

I'm not impressed. Neat, but fairly bland.
posted by Dark Messiah at 4:45 PM on April 30, 2002

I've done some work with SVG. I use it to generate network topology images for network engineers. I have all of the elements in the image hotlinked to an application that pulls the device info from a database.

It's actually pretty swank. I used PHP and Perl to dynamically generate the SVG document, which is really just XML. I even got to use some of that Trig stuff I learned in college :).
posted by winterdrm at 5:39 PM on April 30, 2002

#1 - Ugly site design. (which doesn't do justice to svg)
#2 - Too long to load. (which is because svg is code, not flash)
#3 - Flash kicks the shit out of the "closing curtain" (although I'm sure SVG is useful for certain things, no doubt)
posted by banished at 6:04 PM on April 30, 2002

Every time I view (or try to view) SVG content IE crashes along with explorer.exe. I'm sure I could fix it... but really... why bother?
posted by Fat Elvis at 6:08 PM on April 30, 2002

I think SVG has a place-- it is easy to construct since it's textual instead of a binary format. Wouldn't it be nice if a future version of the Flash player supported SVG in addition to it's own format?

Of course, considering Macromedia makes good money off of Generator, this probably won't happen.
posted by bschoate at 6:46 PM on April 30, 2002

I've now seen yet another blip in the history of online media.
posted by greyscale at 7:02 PM on April 30, 2002

One crap flash site. Everyone says, look at Praystation.

One crap SVG site. Everyone says. 'Tis the death of the format'.

Crap sites happen, this is cool tech poorly used. Sadly.
posted by nedrichards at 7:14 PM on April 30, 2002

Didn't SVG just jump a full version today? So much for winding down. And with some good sites out there now and finally some good writing on the subject, I think SVG is on its way up.
posted by blefr at 9:24 PM on April 30, 2002

I was always pro-SVG and anti-Flash because of my preference for open standards. But then I actually looked around and found this site, and it appears that Macromedia published the specification in 1998. The fact that the SVG standard isn't entirely in the hands of Adobe still gives it an edge in my opinion. Of course, it doesn't matter to me as much as it would if I weren't staunchly anti-plugin for my web designs.
posted by Eamon at 12:26 PM on May 1, 2002

« Older Japan’s Gross National Cool   |   The Ancient Library Of Alexandria: Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments