Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firefox 1.1 Plans Native SVG Support

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the finally-and-excellent dept.

Mozilla 415

Spy Hunter writes "The Scalable Vector Graphics format has yet to take off on the web, perhaps due to a small installed base of SVG-enabled browsers. That could soon change as the latest Firefox 1.1 nightly builds have started coming with native SVG support compiled in and enabled by default. If this feature makes into the Firefox 1.1 release (which is not certain, but likely, as the developers want it to happen) it will increase the number of web users who have an SVG renderer installed. But perhaps more interesting than that is the possibility of mixing SVG graphic elements directly into the markup of regular XHTML pages, freeing vector graphics from the small rectangle of a browser plugin and opening up a host of exciting new possibilities for web developers. This is enabled by the integration of SVG directly into the Gecko rendering engine, instead of as a browser plugin. With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

cancel ×

415 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

And... the big news (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399132)

It contains the fix for the rendering of Slashdot's invalid HTML!

Re:And... the big news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399231)

I think slashdot fixed something so there's no overlapping, but it still doesn't display right.

Re:And... the big news (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399404)

I'm on i686 linux boxes only, and the last I saw I mislayout was firefox-1.0 or 1.0.1.

failure to take off (1)

blakestah (91866) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399140)

Its failure to take off prolly has nothing to do with the ubiquitious support for Flash...

Re:failure to take off (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399152)

Flash is mostly popular on AMD64 boxes *grin*

Re:failure to take off (5, Insightful)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399171)

Its failure to take off prolly has nothing to do with the ubiquitious support for Flash..

Fair point, however I'd say that no, Flash hasn't supplanted the role that SVG could perform, and there still is a huge void waiting to be filled.

The reality is that the web is largely full of static, raster graphics (most graphs, as a simple example, exist as tiny craptacularly printing, non-interactive GIFs) - most of which would be better served by interactive, "infinite resolution" vector graphics.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/03/07/Sca lableVectorGraphics/default.aspx [microsoft.com]

Re:failure to take off (1)

_ph1ux_ (216706) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399290)

I remember when I was at Intel in the late ninties in there DRG group doing the game testing on latest Intel processors, we used to see a lot of web stuff come in for demo that never made it out in the open.

One in particular that i never forgot was a vector based web something (plugin, app browser cant remember) that was a NURBS based graphic manipulator. It had an infinite (almost) resolution dolphin model that was used for the demo...

Re:failure to take off (4, Insightful)

telbij (465356) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399296)

Fair point, however I'd say that no, Flash hasn't supplanted the role that SVG could perform, and there still is a huge void waiting to be filled.

I think his point was more along the lines that Flash lowered the incentive for anyone to rush to market with a really good SVG implementation.

Of course you are correct that full SVG support would be a really good thing for the web. I would go so far as to say it's the most significant advancement of design possibilities since the introduction of the TABLE element.

Re:failure to take off (1)

blakestah (91866) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399452)

Really I was just a bit rushed in an effort to get a first post.

Re:failure to take off (1)

NateKid (44775) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399405)

"Flash hasn't supplanted the role that SVG could perform, and there still is a huge void waiting to be filled."

On the contrary, adobe's takeover of macromedia probably means that svg and flash will be more tightly integrated in the future. And svg doesn't have the mindshare or developer/designer tools that flash has so I'm willing to bet adobe will focus its resources behind flash, its 3 or 4 billion dollar purchase.

Re:failure to take off (5, Interesting)

Naikrovek (667) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399201)

I don't think Flash's existence has anything to do with the non-existance of SVG content. I think the lack of content comes from the lack of viewing methods.

SVG is not just another vector-based image format, it is scriptable, patent-free, open source, and now built into Firefox. Yes, I know Flash is scriptable too...

with XMLHttp, SVG, and the latest nightlies of Firefox, I've been able to create dashboard programs very easily, with "guages", "warning lights", and all the stuff that my management wants to see in a simple easy to understand manner, all with open source software, and a little effort on my part.

It won't be that easy to get it implemented at my employer, but I was able to do it all in a couple hours without Flash.

I'm happy for Flash and SVG to coexist. I'm sure that they can live happily together.

Re:failure to take off (3, Insightful)

willfe (6537) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399240)

I dunno; if this thing works without crashing my browser, hogging 100% of the system's CPU, or blasting irritating sounds (and if it's used for useful content and presentation instead of lame menus or "flash-only" styled pages), it might just take off.

Flash is disabled on this machine because it does exactly one of two things in a web page: 1) show an ad, or 2) replaces perfectly servicable text (or even image-based) links in menus and navigation widgets that just ends up slowing everything down. I've already loaded the page. I shouldn't have to wait for the menus to load, too, just so your cute logo can flicker or rotate or so your menus can do impressive, flashy transitions that slow things down even more.

Re:failure to take off (4, Interesting)

telbij (465356) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399243)

Its failure to take off prolly has nothing to do with the ubiquitious support for Flash...

Considering it was only made a standard in 2001, things are only going slightly slower than CSS and HTML. The real problem is that SVG is hard to implement. I don't disagree that the availability of Flash has lowered the priority, but as far as open-source implementations are concerned, I thnk it was destined to take a while.

Firefox only? not for long... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399145)

could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

No, because IE will adopt a slightly different version of SVG and by virtue of it already containing 80% of the market, will force firefox to display the IE-compatible SVG, and things will be the same as ever before.

Monopolies, y'know?

You know what's funny (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399155)

Had you written this post a year ago, you would've said "90%" of the market. How much you wanna bet it'll be down to 70% or lower in another year?

Re:You know what's funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399264)

Doesn't matter. IE still has a stranglehold on the market.

Re:You know what's funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399301)

No, it does matter. They're obviously losing their grip, and quicker than most expected.

Re:You know what's funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399323)

So, maybe in 10 years, if you're lucky, the poster's argument will be moot, but in the near to mid-term future it doesn't matter. That also doesn't even go to say that Microsoft might get their act together and release a browser that addressess all the problems FF users switched for and adds features that FF doesn't have.

In short, no major websites will be taking advantage of this feature any time soon.

Re:Firefox only? not for long... (3, Insightful)

eggz128 (447435) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399450)


No, because IE will adopt a slightly different version of SVG


You mean VML [w3.org] ? New to Internet Explorer 5! [microsoft.com]

Opera (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399149)

Opera 8.0 has support for SVG-tiny. The question is - what does SVG full have which SVG tiny does not?

Opera-Atkins Diet. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399384)

"Opera 8.0 has support for SVG-tiny. The question is - what does SVG full have which SVG tiny does not?"

A lousy diet plan.

SVG soon widely supported? (3, Interesting)

ikewillis (586793) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399150)

Opera 8.0 supports SVG, and so will IE7. Looks like all the top browsers will soon support SVG...

Re:SVG soon widely supported? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399212)

Yes, and considering that, it's annoying to see opinions in the articles like these

With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

*shakes head*

Oh well, OSS is obviously the "stuff that matters" here.

Re:SVG soon widely supported? (5, Interesting)

Eric Pierce (636318) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399265)

> Opera 8.0 supports SVG, and so will IE7

IE will support SVG natively or via Adobe's horribly outdated SVG plugin?

Please provide a reference link.

Typical (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399151)

Now I'm gonna have to go out and buy an SVG Monitor.

Re:Typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399445)

No, that's SVGA ;)

Excellent (2, Insightful)

514CK3R (875865) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399156)

More broken pages! I love it when browser nazis decide what browser works best for our needs. Evidently more and more people have less and less to say. I remember when http was hyper TEXT transfer protocal.

Re:Excellent (5, Informative)

spectre_240sx (720999) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399209)

Well, you're a little bit off there. HTTP was never Hyper Text Transfer Protocol. It's HyperText Transfer Protocol. Subtle, but it makes a big difference.

hypertext [wikipedia.org]

In computing, hypertext is a user interface paradigm for displaying documents which contain automated cross-references to other documents called hyperlinks. Selecting a hyperlink causes the computer to display the linked document within a very short period of time.

A document can be static (prepared and stored in advance) or dynamically generated (in response to user input). Therefore, a well-constructed hypertext system can encompass, incorporate or supersede many other user interface paradigms like menus and command lines, and can be used to access both static collections of cross-referenced documents and interactive applications. The documents and applications can be local or can come from anywhere with the assistance of a computer network like the Internet. The most famous implementation of hypertext is the World Wide Web.

The term "hypertext" is often used where the term hypermedia would be more appropriate.

Re:Excellent (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399244)

lol @ quoting wikipedia as reliable source

Re:Excellent (2, Insightful)

jericho4.0 (565125) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399364)

What are you? A MS Encarta plant? Repeated AC comments snikering at wikipedia like it was worthless. Do me a favour; go find the many mistakes in the wiki link above.

News for you; nothing is a "reliable source" such that it shouldn't be questioned. Wikipedia provides the best starting point for research on the web.

Re:Excellent (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399291)

SVG is great news for intranets

Re:Excellent (3, Informative)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399347)

Picking on the wrong people. Unlike Flash, SVG isn't some binary kludge. Which means that by using CSS properly, the browser will actually be able to render non-SVG alternatives with little trouble (not even lame javascript browser/plugin detectors).

Excellent-Semantic Pictures. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399401)

Now look at the big picture. Semantic web with pictures that actually can be indexed and searched. Combine that with all the other "X" stuff that the w3c is doing, and...let the fun begin!

SVG Support... (5, Insightful)

geekboy642 (799087) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399157)

...will eventually be widely adopted, but it will be only hours before a spammer uses it to block spam filters--random graphical elements, scattered in the middle of words?

And you thought cyrillic characters were bad.

Re:SVG Support... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399299)

I think you need to read Paul Graham's articles about spam filtering. It doesn't matter what they do, spam still looks like spam. Unless you get a lot of legit mail with "random graphical elements scattered in the middle of words", that will probably be more likely to help your filters than hurt them.

Esentially, everything they do to make their spam less filterable makes it look less and less like legit mail. The result tends to be that it's either easier to filter or there's no difference at all (e.g., the use of a string of random dictionary words tends to have no effect, since the words are weighted neither 'spammy' nor 'not spammy').

cool something new again! (1)

mitrick (852728) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399160)

i hope they insert more features in firefox. More it has the more ie users will switch to it.

Re:cool something new again! (4, Insightful)

khujifig (875862) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399182)

I hope that they choose features carefully and don't start bloating firefox.

I'm all for there being a library of extentions we can add into firefox if we wish to.

I don't think stuffing lots of features into firefox is what would make IE users switch.

Re:cool something new again! (1)

mitrick (852728) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399199)

i got a voice over ip client that runs only on ie5 or ie6, i wish it could work on firefox too. its clicktel the free calling thing. i cracked the whole thing and now free call for life all arround world for free.... thats why more plugins would be nice to firefox.

Re:cool something new again! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399252)

When advertising the fact that you are stealing the services of a particular company, it's probably a good idea to remain anonymous.

And asking Firefox to support more plugins so that you can keep stealing phone service? Yeah...that'll go over well with the devs and any interested corporations.

What is SVG? (5, Interesting)

catisonh (805870) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399163)

Can someone explain to me why its better than a jpg?

Re:What is SVG? (0, Troll)

DoorFrame (22108) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399170)

Because it's going to be Firefox! Duh.

(PS. I have no idea.)

Re:What is SVG? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399191)

SVG stands for Scalable Vector Graphics. JPEG is a bitmap based format, storing the position and colour of pixels, a vector format on the other hand stores information in terms of lines, curves, surfaces, etc. so is scalable whilst retaining quality.

Re:What is SVG? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399196)

It's an image that can be shown in any size without making the pixels show like when you zoom in on for example a jpg.

Re:What is SVG? (4, Informative)

MP3Chuck (652277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399232)

They're not really in a position to be better than a JPG, in the cases where a JPG would be used to display an images with thousdands or millions of colours.

On the other hand, SVG offers an easier (or what seems should be easier) method of dynamically-generating images like charts and graphs. Combined with some javascript (think XMLHttpRequest), you can change and interact with these graphs in realtime. Along with vector graphic's "infinite" resolution you've got a lot of powerful options for graphing alone.

Re:What is SVG? (5, Informative)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399233)

---Why its better than JPEG?

Well, they're both good for different things.

JPEGS are simple raster images. A jpeg and a bitmap are one in the same (with jpeg having good compression). Simply, it comes down to this bit is this color, this bit is this color, and this bit is this color. If you magnify raster images, you end up with blurred and horribly pixellated images that have almost no resemblance of the original.

A SVG (and similar technologies) uses vector graphics. The best way to explain this is thus: Graph a line Y=X on a xy coordinate plane. You end up with a 45 degreee angle. Now, if you were to view a portion between 0 and 10^-100(X) and 0 to 10^-100(y) it's still going to be a line. It's not going to be a stairstep pixelated crap.

Probably the best usage of SVG's would be simple images made for dramatically inbcreasing size (like icons in KDE) or other size-variation.

The only way to do pretty increasing size icons now are to shim a javascript to display 6 or so jpegs that were manually sized. These do not account for resolution on your screen.

Hopefully, Ive made clear what these things are.

Re:What is SVG? (4, Insightful)

Creepy Crawler (680178) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399309)

ANd as an aside, please un-troll who I responded to. Someone who doesnt understand what SVG is would naturally ask this question.

Or should we all assume that we all are super-smart and questions are stupid? If you think so, no wonder people hate lots of techies.

What is SVG?-What's hinting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399416)

SVG needs what Fonts have. Hinting in order to scale properly across the entire range.

Re:What is SVG? (1)

sarastro_us (745933) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399332)

A jpeg is a compressed representation of an image. A SVG is instructions on how to reproduce the image. It's analgous to the difference between an mp3 and a MIDI file. With a jpeg or an mp3, the producer of the file decides at what detail (bitrate, resolution, etc.) the representation will be. With a SVG or a MIDI file, the users are free to taylor it to their needs.

Addds (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399168)

Wow! Imagine how much more exciting it will be to punch the monkey!!

Re:Addds (1)

sharkey (16670) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399441)

My monkey doesn't like to be punched, so I spank it instead.

Cool... (2, Funny)

TeleoMan (529859) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399169)

...but I have only a VGA monitor you insenstive clown!

Re:Cool... (1)

Rorschach1 (174480) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399361)

I HAD a nice monitor until Friday, when a brand new install of Red Hat 9 chose the wrong frequency settings for XFree86.

Guess I'll have to wait for SVG support in Lynx.

"only in Firefox" (5, Insightful)

MP3Chuck (652277) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399172)

"With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

No.

First of all, it's also available in Opera 8.

Second of all, at the risk of sounding like a troll, people will simply find ways around using SVG until IE supports it ... just like they have for PNG and (proper) CSS2.

Re:"only in Firefox" (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399431)

Second of all, at the risk of sounding like a troll, people will simply find ways around using SVG until IE supports it ... just like they have for PNG and (proper) CSS2.

Somehow I think you're right. What would make a huge difference in the adoption of SVG would be if adobe post-acquisition makes the flash team incorporate native SVG support in flash. Flash is ubiquitous, cross platform, and small. It would be the logical choice for anyone doing SVG in the browser. Ofcourse, whether flash would still be small with a native SVG implementation is something else entirely. But hey ...

Then again, it wouldn't have to be entirely native. I've written an SVG class for flash, and it is actually not bad performance wise, as long as you stick to what's natively supported (lines and quadratic curves). Importing and rendering half a meg of SVG can be done in a few seconds entirely in actionscript. If the flash drawing API had support for a few more of the primitives SVG has, you could write a quite useful actionscript-based SVG class for generic SVG import and rendering. Couple it with an actionscript DOM implementation, and tie it in with the existing CSS mechanisms in flash, and you would get quite a lot of mileage out of it without bloating the player by more than a few KB.

It's only OK if it's us. (5, Insightful)

Tokerat (150341) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399173)


[...] could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?
I'd prefer it if websites didn't have to recommend a browser at all, which is the whole reason we have web standards like HTML in the first place.

Re:It's only OK if it's us. (2, Insightful)

Eric Pierce (636318) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399396)

What if a browser (in wide circulation) has poor/broken adherence to "web standards", security issues up the wazoo and generally sucks Possum pooh?

Javascript SVG Sparklines (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399174)

This is really cool, since it will allow the Javascript SVG library I wrote to work without the adobe plugin!

Javascript SVG Sparklines [overstimulate.com]

wasn't this in kde 3.2? (4, Interesting)

Zugot (17501) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399175)

from http://svg.kde.org/ [kde.org]


STABLE VECTORS
2004-02-18 18:38:29 by Andreas Streichardt KDE 3.2 has been released and thus KSVG is stable now. If you want to have KSVG installed on your system please install the kdegraphics package. The KSVG team wishes happy vectoring. Please report any bugs via http://bugs.kde.org./ [bugs.kde.org]

Re:wasn't this in kde 3.2? (1)

rzei (622725) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399246)

Well I'm using latest Kubuntu and opening an .svg file (random from net, the onlyone though) resulted not in a svg file but konqueror asking me what to do.

Though this could just be kubuntu sucking it again.

Re:wasn't this in kde 3.2? (2, Informative)

Klivian (850755) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399338)

Verify you got something like kdegraphichs-ksvg installed. And make sure in settings->configure Konqueror the file association for svg are set to embedding in ksvgplugin.

Adblock *.svg (5, Insightful)

bender647 (705126) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399180)

freeing vector graphics from the small rectangle of a browser plugin and opening up a host of exciting new possibilities for web developers
Sounds like a whole new annoying type of advertising coming our way.

Re:Adblock *.svg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399287)

Rather than adblocking *.svg, it will probably be necessary to be able to cull svg from arbitrary xhtml web pages. Firefox will be fully capable of displaying integrated html.

That said, being able to cull certain elements would be a great ability for Gecko to have anyway, if it can't do it already.

Look at Greasemonkey (2, Informative)

bstadil (7110) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399381)

being able to cull certain elements would be a great ability for Gecko

Look at Greasemonkey [mozdev.org] , You can do this today in FF

Re:Adblock *.svg (3, Insightful)

Narchie Troll (581273) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399460)

That won't work, actually. The SVG will be embedded directly into the page source.

There isn't really much SVG can do to annoy you that can't already be done with liberal use of CSS and Javascript.

I would kill for SVG in schema (4, Interesting)

hrieke (126185) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399181)

I work a lot with Databases, and their schema.
I'm also sick and tired of wallpapering my cubial with schema print out from the plotter. SVG DB schema would be an excellent tool to have- go from a 30,000 ft view to a grass blade view with out having to load up different pages, or deal with a wall paper print out.

Someone wanna make the tool?

What graphic editors support SVG? (4, Interesting)

dananderson (1880) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399194)

What graphic editors support SVG? I use mostly PaintShop on Windoz and Gimp on Linux and Solaris. Both are raster-oriented.

I used to use Corel and WordPerfect Presentations, which has a propriety vector graphics format, WPG.

Re:What graphic editors support SVG? (2, Informative)

torpor (458) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399229)

inskcape, sodipodi. two very wonderful examples of open source producing very useful tools.

i use both, personally. SVG has been a primary format target for me as a programmer for a couple years now ..

Re:What graphic editors support SVG? (1)

Saval (39101) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399239)

I would suggest trying Inkscape: http://www.inkscape.org/ [inkscape.org]

Re:What graphic editors support SVG? (3, Informative)

cei (107343) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399286)

Adobe Illustrator

What graphic editors support SVG?-Jasc (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399432)

Jasc Webdraw [corel.com]

How about supporting CSS properly first? (0, Flamebait)

melted (227442) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399204)

Come on, the best browser on the planet doesn't pass Acid2 test. You ARE committed to standards, aren't you, folks?

Sure, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399314)

... acid2 is a relatively orthogonal issue.

Also, acid2 support will be noticed by very people. SVG support will be relevant to everyone who uses the browser.

Not that I'm sure that the relevance will be in a net positive way, mind you. :)

Re:How about supporting CSS properly first? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399358)

Well, good thing the Acid2 test doesn't test for standards-compliance; it tests for a browser's ability to "do the right thing" when given bad CSS. Nice argument, though; I bet you also think we should not bother prosecuting lesser crimes than murder. I think we'll keep using parallel development, thanks.

Developers dictating users' browsers? (3, Insightful)

RHIC (640535) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399205)

"With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

With the continual complaints I see about people irritated by sites that use features only supported by IE, and that cause the page to render incorrectly in other browsers, why would developers using Firefox-only features be any different or better?

Re:Developers dictating users' browsers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399223)

IE rendering, and thus encouraging, badly coded pages is simply a bad thing. Web browsers supporting standards that anyone can use is a good thing. It also doesn't hurt that Mozilla based browsers are available on most platforms, while IE is limited to Windows now. The Mac version of IE is dead.

Re:Developers dictating users' browsers? (1)

etnoy (664495) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399351)

With the continual complaints I see about people irritated by sites that use features only supported by IE, and that cause the page to render incorrectly in other browsers, why would developers using Firefox-only features be any different or better?

Well, the main reason for that to be not-as-serious as IE-only is that FF is open and you are therefore not locked into one vendor in the same way. Also, SVG is open, meaning that anyone can implement it. Saying "FF-only" is a bit wrong, since what it really means in this context is an SVG-capable browser.

double standards (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399207)

Firefox only pages are great
IE only pages are evil

No Firefox Only Sites, Please (5, Insightful)

idiotfromia (657688) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399210)

With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?"

The keyword is best. Lets just hope some webmasters don't start doing what some IE designers have done, blocked out an entire website because of not using the correct browser. Most of the sites that say my Firefox is "not up-to-date as the latest Interenet Explorer" will render just fine, if they hadn't put up blockades to their content.

It's their loss.

Small quirk needs fixing (0, Offtopic)

zymano (581466) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399217)

The bookmarks on the left side don't show the URL fast enough when point at the link with a mouse.Using the menu bookmarks covers up the URL .

I also noticed some 'websites' have found a way to not show the link url in firefox. Opera doesn't have this problem.

Mixing SVG into XHTML: Standard? (1)

gsasha (550394) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399220)

Won't it be regarded as an embrace-or-extend move by Mozilla? Is there some relevant standard (except for SVG itself) for this? Is there some graceful degradation mechanism built-in for browsers that don't support this feature?
That said, sounds like a cool feature with lots of potential uses.

Yes (1)

meldir (571781) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399306)

Well, I'm not sure if it can count as a standard already, but at least the w3 is working on it:

http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-XHTMLplusMathMLplusSV G-20020809/ [w3.org]

And BTW, the XHTML + MathML part of this has been implemented in Firefox for a long time, and I love it. No hassle with putting every formula in a separate MathML document.

"download Firefox to get the best browsing..." (4, Insightful)

NuclearDog (775495) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399253)

(From TFA) "With such a useful web developer feature available only in Firefox, could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?""

Sure, if the webmasters are fucking retards.

Think about it, if you use SVG all over your site and say "Download Firefox or you wont be able to view this site." the 9X% (I use 9X since no one agrees on numbers.) Internet Explorer users would simply hit the back button and go find somewhere else to get whatever they were wanting from your site.

The only case where that might be acceptable is maybe in a situation where there is only a few users or where you are the exclusive provider of information on a topic.

So yes, webmasters will start telling users that they have to use FF to view their website... if they're fucking retards.

ND

Re:"download Firefox to get the best browsing..." (3, Informative)

geekboy642 (799087) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399302)

They'll only hit the back button if they can tell the page is obviously borked. If the webmister has done his/her/its work properly, the page will degrade to a level that IE can handle, without becoming craptastic.
Ex: Implement SVG as a bandwidth savings measure, then keep static PNG/GIF images around for when IE shows up. That's why the webserver is told which browser is visiting, IIRC.

Please: SVG Maps (4, Interesting)

jfengel (409917) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399274)

I'd love to see Mapquest/GoogleMaps/etc start sending maps in SVG. They currently use low-resolution formats for the screen, and they look terrible when printed, especially street names. They're also hard to zoom in on. And I'd like to think that it might be smaller to send the map vectorized than sending every pixel. (The blank spaces compress nicely, but text-as-graphic doesn't.)

Google Maps is a significant advance over what I've seen at Mapquest/Yahoo Maps, but they can do a lot better.

They could have used PDF, but that requires a separate and not-very-interactive application, or Flash, but that's plain evil. SVG really is the way to go for this.

Re:Please: SVG Maps (4, Insightful)

AndyCap (97274) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399400)

I fear that the map data copyright holders would object to this, since the data would now be far easier to take, and reprocess into large maps for your own use.

XML for graphics? Talk about size. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399278)

Won't that take loads of bits for anything more than simplest?

Don't fancy a Firefox-oriented brave new world (2, Insightful)

Lemming Mark (849014) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399288)

> could we soon start seeing websites asking their users to download Firefox to get the best browsing experience?

Please noooooo! I use Konqueror for all my web browsing. It works for about 95% of the sites I want to visit - I don't want that number to go down :-(

I think Konqueror supports SVG but I don't suppose it supports embedding it directly in XHTML.

OTOH, when the KDE port of Firefox is done (yes, there is one!) then I won't mind so much :-)

Opera (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399317)

Opera 8 already supports native SVG. Firefox is lagging behind yet again.

Visual histry plugin (1)

emj (15659) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399333)

Nice, then I won't have to compile mozilla to run the Visualhistory plugin: WebMap [sakura.ne.jp] It's a wonderfull way to get a grip of your surfinghistory, which IMHO isn't that good by default. Sadly the guy who made it is form Japan, do most of the doc is quiete unreadable for most people.

I believe that browser history has been neglected for a long time.

"only in Firefox" - NOT (2, Interesting)

JohnQPublic (158027) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399369)

This integrated-SVG is planned for FireFox 1.1 and already available in Opera 8.

Closed-source software rules, at least sometimes :-)

It's about time! :) (1)

Eric Pierce (636318) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399374)

It's about time! :)

I always thought Mozilla's smooth and transparent SVG implementation was leaps and bounds over Macromedia's Flash plugin which feels like a second-hand browser afterthought.

I envision thousands of pages springing up w/sweet SVG content running in Firefox/Opera only (WebCore/KHtml too?). As Internet "power" users will naturally want the full Internet experience... they'll jump the IE ship in droves!

An earlier poster claimed IE would have support for SVG (via the buggy Adobe SVG plugin?), but I don't imagine IE will implement this natively for 7.0. Again, I question IE's support for SVG until I see a substantiated web reference claiming so.

Note: Current bee's knees for SVG samples: http://www.croczilla.com/svg/samples/ [croczilla.com]

Party at trolltalk! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399387)

Clothing optional!

XForms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12399380)

SVG support are great news for our beloved Firefox but what, IMHO, would be a killer feature will be XForms support in order to make all those akward "tecnologies?" like ASP, JSP, JSF, tiles and such to "softly and suddenly vanish away".

AFAIK the XForms Mozilla project http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xforms/ [mozilla.org] is progressing right but it will just be great if it could also be available too.

Regards.

Save the bandwidth! (2, Insightful)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399382)

I was excited when I first heard of SVG because bandwidth was much more limited back in those days. What did I have, a 56k modem that took forever to load up all but the simplest web pages? The idea that a simple text file could generate beautiful vector graphics was an indication that the web as a whole was about to change into a much richer environment.

Sadly, SVG really wasn't adopted. I hope that its inclusion in Opera and Firefox will change all of that, because many websites that currently use images for a lot of their content could make things look better and take up less space with things like CSS2 and SVG.

Saving bandwidth is still important in these days of broadband and whatnot, because the more you cut down the amount of unnecessary stuff zapping across the 'net, the more cool stuff that really requires the bandwidth (like movies, music, and all that stuff "they've" been promising us since the 80's with "convergence") will be able to get through.

Combine the powerful client-stuff you can do with all these standards with server-side dynamic generation and you end up with a system that should be able to display any type of content with no problem.

Out of the box (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399420)

Can't we already mix SVG (when otherwise supported) by including it in a DIV layer?

More open standard options is GOOD (1)

DumbSwede (521261) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399455)

I can't imagine giving people more open standard options is a bad thing. If SVG in a regular page starts to take off Microsoft will have no choice but to offer SVG as well. Granted they'll try to pollute the standard and add Microsoft only extensions, but most major sites have learned their lesson and will code to the original common denominator of SVG.

Microsoft may alternately try to come up with their on completely proprietary version of SVG supported only in IE, but I think they would have a hard time now getting major support for IE only view of websites. Ah what a difference a year or two makes.

Keep on raising the bar FireFox -- make Microsoft support open standards instead of coming up with closed solutions on their own to fill a vacuum.

As for people complaining there will soon be too many unviewable sites in [insert your favorite browser], what major site would code to a base of 5%? More likely they would offer two ways to view the same content until the other browsers come on board. It'll never happen if you don't let new functionality in. No one wants Microsoft driving the evolution of Web standards (OK the folks in Redmond do).

Unlike Microsoft products and backward compatibility, these improvements will be well greeted because they won't break old HTML.

The Doors SVG Opens Up (4, Interesting)

LionKimbro (200000) | more than 9 years ago | (#12399456)

When you open up the SVG door, you don't just make space for "pretty pictures." You ALSO get,...

  • Visual Programming Languages - because they're so easy to make, once it's easy to move shapes around on the screen and aggregate diagrams.
  • non-boxy user-interface - look at the UI all around you- it's characterized almost exclusively by boxes. Many problems are best described by hooking pieces together, spatially. But our UI is all set up for entering or selecting text into boxes.
  • Graphs, graphs, graphs - as in circles connected by lines. Collaborative organization of ideas on a spatial surface.

As SVG comes on line, at both the web-browser level and the desktop-programming level, and as people become proficient in these things, we'll make a major step forward in user interface.

Working with graphs will change the way we think. Our tools have, so far, afforded [emacswiki.org] creating hierarchical structures. That is, it's far easier to express hierarchy with text editors, than it is to express network. Hierarchy is fine, but it's only part of the picture. The other part is more-biological looking network organizations. As the tools come online to create biological organizations (as we see appearing in message-oriented programming models, component based developments,) we'll think about programming (and perhaps our world) in very different ways.

To make this a little clearer: If you look in magazine articles where they're discussing programming architecture and software layout, you're going to see lots of 2D diagrams with lots of pieces plugging into other pieces in a graphical layout- sort of like a circuit board. This is different than the way we have traditionally programmed, which is more like a tree shape. Even within object oriented programming, because our interface still affords tree layouts. Where we have explored beyond tree layouts, (complex networks of design patterns,) we have struggled with the user interface, and people have stretched out to make better representations that capture graph-like programs: Think of your clumbsy UML editors, and things like that- really trying to hack a solution between more-or-less linear code expressions, and the 2D graphs that we're thinking in.

When SVG is well understood, documented, with tools at desktop and web levels, we should start to see native 2D programming languages, that don't feel like either toy languages, or cheap hacks riding on top of other programming languages.

I've written more about this at Futures:SvgRevolution. [taoriver.net]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?