On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 00:47:48 -0400 Rob <lau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Saturday 30 August 2003 22:01, RTaylor wrote: > > Flash runs in Wine but... why not go with something a little > > more standardized? SVG. > > Because file format standards are no good to an artist unless > your audience can handle the format and the format can handle > your art? Adobe's viewer is free... so's Corels. Installation's no more complex than installing the Flash viewer. Both companies offer http://www.adobe.com/products/golive/main.html http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=Corel/Products/productInfo&id=1042152819585 authoring tools that are every bit as capable as Macromedias. The open source movement offers many more tools to author SVG than to author SWF. {It's one of linux's strongpoints.} http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/SVG-Implementations.htm8#svgedit As far as audio goes... Real's Helix project gives you the http://www.realnetworks.com/products/producer/ https://www.helixcommunity.org/2002/intro/potential-projects tools to do anything you need at the same level of quality that any other system on the 'net can give you. It's the format that the w3c intends to call standard... http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Overview.htm8 It's as capable and usable as SWF... There's absolutely no reason not to use it. > I know what I'd be using today if I were a cartoonist or animator > and it ain't SVG... not even sure it can handle some of the > stuff I've seen people do with SWF. (Kind of like how the GIF > patent expired in the US before PNG ever got support for > animation....) How much of the stuff at, say, > homestarrunner.com is SVG ready to handle right now without > making the end user jump through hoops? And are the creation > tools anywhere near as useful or would they be writing XML in > emacs when they should be drawing funny, TV-quality cartoons? > > Ultimately, when you're confronted with a choice between a > well-supported and complete proprietary "standard" and a > nascent, not entirely ready for end users open "standard", you > end up having to decide which is more important to you: your own > artistic (or commercial) statement or the free vs. proprietary > debate. Most artists have enough invested in their work for it > to take precedence over software philosophy. Even Stallman's Any artist worth his salt researches his tools to a fairly high degree. {Tho' that does seem to be going out of favor} > hilarious "gather round and share the software" song ended up in > mp3 format at some point before Ogg was ready... and I can't see > myself putting music out there in anything but mp3, even now. I > gotta think it'll be an even longer wait before you can have the > expectation that the mainstream user will be able to see your > visual work if it's in SVG format. > > Rob > >
