[sword-devel] SVG module (an idea)
jonmmorgan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 26 05:40:03 MST 2010
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Greg Hellings <greg.hellings at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:43 PM, David <davidslists at gmx.net> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 21, 2010 01:50:11 pm Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> >> Hi guys,
> >> I just saw this here in Wikimedia commons:
> >> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Ampel.svg
> >> It is an svg file which has java script integrated.
> > You could potentially do this with HTML5 and not have to use SVG which
> > would require fewer additions to front ends to support, as they would
> > have to update their HTML rendering engines to support 5, instead of
> > adding svg parsing and rendering.
> BibleTime generally tracks the latest releases of Qt, which includes
> QtWebKit. I don't know how much lag there is between WebKit main and
> QtWebKit, but I can't imagine it not supporting SVG images - since Qt
> supports them quite well. BibleTime uses SVGs in several places
> already IIRC.
> In general SVG is supported wider and more standardly than HTML5. I'm
> fairly sure that Cairo (GTK stack) supports it. Qt supports it.
> WebKit supports it. Almost certain Gecko/Firefox supports it. That
> means it's likely already supported in BibleTime and Xiphos (if built
> with Xulrunner). I think BPBible uses wxHTML which is rather pathetic
> - so I doubt it has support. But wxWidgets might have SVG support
> outside of the HTML widget. I'm certain Java has support for SVG
> images, even if the Java HTML widget does not.
The next major version of BPBible is intended to use XULRunner with
Due to the fact that SVG has been in the wild for almost 10 years,
> you're likely to find that SVG support is much stronger than HTML5
> support which has not finished its draft revision process yet. So
> you're more likely to get SVG support in front ends than HTML5
> support. In fact you'll find that
> IE alone among the "major browsers" does not support SVG - there are
In actual practice, I think SVG support and HTML 5 support have a lot in
common, since most browsers will support a subset of both rather than the
full thing (many elements of HTML 5 have been around for a long time as
well). I don't have a clear idea of which subsets are supported by which
browsers (I would assume the useful parts - but that will probably apply to
HTML 5 as well). Static images are probably a better chance than dynamic
images. As an example, the Mozilla page is at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the sword-devel