geraldbauer2005
2005-09-19 17:54:21 UTC
Hello,
The SVG Open 2006 Conference organizer have setup a public
mailinglist for planning and coordinating the upcoming conference on
all things XML held in Victoria, British Columbia.
Kurt Cagle - the conference chair - writes on XAML:
Trying to figure out where to put XAML has long been one of the more
challenging parts of this puzzle - I tend, like Antoine, to be leery
about necessarily giving XAML too large a space, but at the same time
recognize that in this part of the world especially, Microsoft is an
important player and should not be excluded entirely from the
discussion.
I want to stress that to me, there are three fundamental aspects that
define SVG technology that should be used as reasonable criteria in
evaluating whether a given alternative technology should be given air
time --
1) Is the technology in question an open standard? In other words, is
the technology freely implementable by others without licensing fees
or membership in a particular company's for fee developer network?
This would tend to limit XAML participation, though given that it is
in essence a "competing" technology, I would dare say that it behooves
the community to at least be aware of it.
2) Is the technology XML based? Secondarily, if it is not itself an
XML schema based system, can it be made to work with or in the context
of an XML language? By this light, the Canvas object should be given
some credence, as it is likely to be used in some fashion in
conjunction with SVG, even if it is not a formal W3C standard.
3) Is it a presentation based technology? By this, I mean that the
language is used to create some form of sensory (principally, but not
exclusively, visual) interface. This means that papers concerning X3D,
SVG, XSL-FO, and even XHTML and XUL should be considered, but papers
that are exclusively oriented towards areas such as RDF would probably
not be unless they include some aspect of this presentation layer.
I think the judicious use of these rules sets up the groundwork for
which technologies are likely to fall under the rubrick of the
conference and which aren't.
To me, papers which present a comparison between XAML and SVG fall
well within the scope of the conference, and I'm not necessarily going
to be shy in allowing pro-XAML panels ... SO LONG AS THEY RELATE TO
SVG, and so long as both sides in this debate can be seen. There are
some features about XAML that I think the SVG community should be
aware of in order to help build a stronger foundation for the rich
interleaved W3C stack, and while there is always a certain degree of
... okay, fun ... to be had in bashing Microsoft, I think that it
serves neither the SVG community nor our clients to stick our heads in
the sand and ignore both the promise and threat of that technology.
Canvas represents a slightly different challenge. Canvas represents an
increasingly de facto standard for doing imperative graphics within
the web browser context, and while there are some fairly sizeable
problems with the specification (sic) as it stands, there is also an
increasing contingent of web developers who are willing to overlook
those problems and develop imperatively - with Mozilla and Safari
support, indications that Opera will be going this way and the very
distinct likelihood that the next version of Netscape will also be
going this way, I think that the conference ignores Canvas at its
peril. As someone who's worked heavily with XML based declarative
languages, I tend to cringe when I see canvas, but I also recognize
that for many people, the idea of creating declarative-based graphics
is the stranger proposition.
Note that these are only my personal opinions. I would definitely like
to hear counter-arguments on all of these points as well, as I think
that resolving these WILL be crucial to establishing a good set of
tracks for next year.
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svgopen2006/message/7
What's your take? Do you want to see talks on MS-XAML and
alternatives such as Declara (formerly MyXAML) at the SVG Open show?
- Gerald
- Gerald
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job). Welcome to the Sweet Life.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/A77XvD/vlQLAA/TtwFAA/nhFolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
_________________________________________
United XAML | http://unitedxaml.org
XAML Forum & News | http://xamlnews.com
The SVG Open 2006 Conference organizer have setup a public
mailinglist for planning and coordinating the upcoming conference on
all things XML held in Victoria, British Columbia.
Kurt Cagle - the conference chair - writes on XAML:
Trying to figure out where to put XAML has long been one of the more
challenging parts of this puzzle - I tend, like Antoine, to be leery
about necessarily giving XAML too large a space, but at the same time
recognize that in this part of the world especially, Microsoft is an
important player and should not be excluded entirely from the
discussion.
I want to stress that to me, there are three fundamental aspects that
define SVG technology that should be used as reasonable criteria in
evaluating whether a given alternative technology should be given air
time --
1) Is the technology in question an open standard? In other words, is
the technology freely implementable by others without licensing fees
or membership in a particular company's for fee developer network?
This would tend to limit XAML participation, though given that it is
in essence a "competing" technology, I would dare say that it behooves
the community to at least be aware of it.
2) Is the technology XML based? Secondarily, if it is not itself an
XML schema based system, can it be made to work with or in the context
of an XML language? By this light, the Canvas object should be given
some credence, as it is likely to be used in some fashion in
conjunction with SVG, even if it is not a formal W3C standard.
3) Is it a presentation based technology? By this, I mean that the
language is used to create some form of sensory (principally, but not
exclusively, visual) interface. This means that papers concerning X3D,
SVG, XSL-FO, and even XHTML and XUL should be considered, but papers
that are exclusively oriented towards areas such as RDF would probably
not be unless they include some aspect of this presentation layer.
I think the judicious use of these rules sets up the groundwork for
which technologies are likely to fall under the rubrick of the
conference and which aren't.
To me, papers which present a comparison between XAML and SVG fall
well within the scope of the conference, and I'm not necessarily going
to be shy in allowing pro-XAML panels ... SO LONG AS THEY RELATE TO
SVG, and so long as both sides in this debate can be seen. There are
some features about XAML that I think the SVG community should be
aware of in order to help build a stronger foundation for the rich
interleaved W3C stack, and while there is always a certain degree of
... okay, fun ... to be had in bashing Microsoft, I think that it
serves neither the SVG community nor our clients to stick our heads in
the sand and ignore both the promise and threat of that technology.
Canvas represents a slightly different challenge. Canvas represents an
increasingly de facto standard for doing imperative graphics within
the web browser context, and while there are some fairly sizeable
problems with the specification (sic) as it stands, there is also an
increasing contingent of web developers who are willing to overlook
those problems and develop imperatively - with Mozilla and Safari
support, indications that Opera will be going this way and the very
distinct likelihood that the next version of Netscape will also be
going this way, I think that the conference ignores Canvas at its
peril. As someone who's worked heavily with XML based declarative
languages, I tend to cringe when I see canvas, but I also recognize
that for many people, the idea of creating declarative-based graphics
is the stranger proposition.
Note that these are only my personal opinions. I would definitely like
to hear counter-arguments on all of these points as well, as I think
that resolving these WILL be crucial to establishing a good set of
tracks for next year.
Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svgopen2006/message/7
What's your take? Do you want to see talks on MS-XAML and
alternatives such as Declara (formerly MyXAML) at the SVG Open show?
- Gerald
- Gerald
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get Bzzzy! (real tools to help you find a job). Welcome to the Sweet Life.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/A77XvD/vlQLAA/TtwFAA/nhFolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
_________________________________________
United XAML | http://unitedxaml.org
XAML Forum & News | http://xamlnews.com