Re: Why it is not recommended? (was: Can we put SVG code in HTML?)
- "Don XML" <donxml@...> wrote in message
>As far as I know (and I may be wrong) RCC is a SVG only API (and I'mWhat do you want in a rendering API?
>not even sure I should call it an API).
> What about XHTML, SMIL, CSS and MathML?The W3 has one language which defines a rendering. that is SVG, and with
RCC you can use RCC to render XHTML or MATHML or your own XML vocabulary,
the rendering is of course defined in terms of an SVG document, but why is
that a problem, having another rendering language (even if it's purely in
terms of "paint bits of content" API level.
> RCC needs to be a level below the actual markupCould you explain exactly what you mean, I'm confused about what you're
>languages, and not something just for graphic interfaces.
asking for here.
Rendering arbitrary XML is something that exists in SVG 1.2. It doesn't
need anything new to be added, that doesn't mean it's the same as the MS
solution, it's not they're aiming for different problem spaces, and have
different constraints on them.
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Don XML" <donxml@h...> wrote:
> Browsing in Longhorn isn't done via another application (like IE oncurrent
> Windows) but is baked into the OS. The OS is a browser. The
> alpha I'm playing with does have IE, but I'm not sure if the finalthe
> version will. Also, MS isn't pitching XAML to be used over the
> Internet, but in corporate Intranets. Will some people use it on
> Internet, sure, but so far that isn't the main thrust of XAML.How will XAML be used on the Internet? Directly from the new OS? With
> DonMXL Demsak
a XAML viewer? With XAML built into IE by Microsoft?
Did I hear correctly that MS might phase out IE? If the OS is a
browser, that would make sense. And, if they aimed to replicate IE
market share, it would also be the ultimate strategy to "embrace and
extend" the Internet.