Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [svg-developers] Simple Question, I think I know the answer

Expand Messages
  • AndrewWatt2001@aol.com
    In a message dated 31/01/01 07:02:53 GMT Standard Time, jodoins@netcon.net.au ... Hi Steve, As far as I can see there isn t a problem. Tell your friend to go
    Message 1 of 34 , Jan 31, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 31/01/01 07:02:53 GMT Standard Time, jodoins@...
      writes:


      Someone I put on to SVG the other day tried to download the viewer from the
      Adobe site and said she was only given the option of getting the 2.0 beta.  
      Can't believe this would be the case.  Could someone confirm that this is a
      problem at the users end.  Thx.



      Hi Steve,

      As far as I can see there isn't a problem. Tell your friend to go direct to
      this URL (for Viewer v1)

      http://www.adobe.com/svg/viewer/install/main.html

      Andrew Watt
    • Chris Lilley
      ... Yes. See at the end some small test result where I compared the raw file size with the gzipped size and also the size compressed with XMill, a program for
      Message 34 of 34 , Feb 5, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Michael Bierman wrote:
        >
        > Chris has a good point. Compression would help significantly, providing up
        > to an 80% reduction in file size.

        Yes. See at the end some small test result where I compared the raw file
        size with the gzipped size and also the size compressed with XMill, a
        program for compressing XML files. This shows up to a 90% reduction in file
        size.

        > However, I think that there is another
        > thing going on. I believe that Adil is using Frame-based animation. This may
        > be providing better animation speed in the Adobe SVG Viewer for now, but is
        > a lot less efficient from a file size perspective.

        Ah, OK. In that case, identifying repeated elements and making them symbols
        (with a use in each frame that needs that symbol) will help a lot with file
        size.

        > Perhaps this is a
        > reasonable trade off for the moment, but will probably not be the best way
        > to go once we improve our animation performance of Declarative and
        > JavaScript based animations. At that point, using SVG's ability to change an
        > object's attributes to create an animation will allow for much smaller
        > files.

        Yes. There will probably still be a need for some frame-baszed stuff, but
        more as keyframes - with declarative animation used to make adjustments
        from the keyframe.

        6,826 histogram.svg
        1,006 histogram.zip 15.617%
        987 histogram.svg.xm 14.459%

        11,779 logistic.svg
        1,574 Logistic.zip 13.363%
        1,535 logistic.svg.xm 13.032%

        20,338 newlion.svg
        7,519 Newlion.zip 36.970%
        7,369 newlion.svg.xm 36.233%

        38,936 symbols.svg
        9,623 Symbols.zip 24.715%
        9,275 symbols.svg.xm 23.821%

        91,558 chrischart.svg
        10,632 chrischart.zip 11.612%
        8,461 chrischart.svg.xm 9.241%

        96,558 tiger.svg
        31,827 Tiger.zip 32.962%
        31,716 tiger.svg.xm 32.847%

        99,570 fyran.svg
        25,466 Fyran.zip 25.576%
        24,066 fyran.svg.xm 24.170%

        112,719 picasso.svg
        38,205 Picasso.zip 33.894%
        37,401 picasso.svg.xm 33.180%

        193,108 Ausmap.svg
        38,695 Ausmap.zip 20.038%
        35,490 ausmap.svg.xm 18.378%

        225,706 california.svg
        51,958 california.zip 23.020%
        49,521 california.svg.xm 21.940%

        4,060,509 fr2.svg
        573,633 Fr2.zip 14.127%
        513,983 fr2.svg.xm 12.658%
        --
        Chris Lilley
        Chair, W3C SVG WG : Chair, W3C CSS WG : Graphics Activity Lead
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.