Interesting topic, as usual. I can only comment about one area. On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 23:31:43 -0500 "ddailey" <ddai...@zoominternet.net> wrote:
> Challenge: come up with "better" symbols for signifying "public > domain" or "copyright free." > [snip] > Look inside the two figures and you'll see several questions that > pose themselves: is it better to use <use>? > does striking all the sodipodi stuff erase some of the artist's > brushstrokes?*** are two paths with one rotating the other better > than one that has twice as coordinates listed? doesn't it make more > sense to let color be inherited from the group rather than > individually defined for each path? what about the optical illusion > of the letters pd for public domain? Should that be made semantic in > our markup? I find all of these questions are variations of one theme that I spend a fair amount of time thinking about, in SVG and in programming. How do we convey "intent" in the code? In many cases, the answer to all of the above questions is "it depends". One of the big differences for me between SVG and the raster graphics I've worked with before is the fact that objects in SVG can retain some identity. In raster graphics, you can argue that all that matters is the final look of the image. Everything is reduced to a grid of pixels in the end. With SVG, on the other hand, we have both the visible result of the image and the objects from which it was constructed. Which method was used in that construction can reveal some of what the artist was thinking when constructing the image. For example, all of the following represent the same shape (assuming that #tablerect references the right kind of element). But, to me they say different things. <rect x="10" y="10" width="100" height="50" /> <polygon points="10,10 110,10 110,60 10,60" /> <path d="M10,10l110,10 110,60 10,60z" /> <use xlink:href="#tablerect" x="10" y="10" /> The <rect> is a specific shape. If it had an id or class attributes, it might tell me more about the intent of this rectangle. The <polygon> is a more general construct. I have to pay more attention to be sure that it is actually a rectangle. The "rectangle-ness" of the object appears less important to the artist. The <path> is a really generic element. This kind of implies that the artist was less concerned about the "shape" of the object and more concerned about the look of the output. The <use> element suggests that we are using an instance of a more generic object. The id of the referenced element gives us a clue to the author's intent. To circle back around to some of David's questions, I would ask a meta-question. What is the intent of the image: the look or the semantic content? If the intent is to generate a particular look, then any mechanism that results in the correct look is acceptable. If semantics matter, then the questions take on a new meaning. The <use> element is appropriate if the references are in some sense "identical objects" that we are using in multiple places. Using a path and a rotated reference to that path, suggests that they are semantically similar or the same. Duplicating the points suggests that they are only coincidentally the same (maybe they will change at some point). Inheriting color from a group suggests that all of the child elements involved are part of a set. The color is a representation of this relationship. In the above text, I say that particular constructions "suggest" rather than "declare" particular semantics. I do this because there are exceptions to every one of the examples. But, these suggestions are part of the (semantic) richness that draws me to SVG as a format. Apologies for the long-winded response. I really thought it was going to be shorter when I began.<shrug/> G. Wade -- Machines take me by surprise with great frequency. -- Alan Turing ------------------------------------ ----- To unsubscribe send a message to: svg-developers-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com -or- visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click "edit my membership" ----Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: svg-developers-dig...@yahoogroups.com svg-developers-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: svg-developers-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
