XML in Mozilla 1.0
Monday July 1st, 2002
#4 It's not true, rather too optimistic
Friday July 5th, 2002 6:42 AM
You are replying to this message
It's not true, but not for the reason you suggest.
Mozilla's SVG support is woefully inadequate and doesn't come even close to meeting the standard, whereas Adobe's plugin is fairly full-featured. There isn't 'incompatibility' between the two products: one (Adobe's) works, one (Mozilla's) doesn't.
This isn't a diss to Mozilla's SVG support - the reason Mozilla's SVG support sucks is that it isn't finished yet, and work is continuing. I am sure that when Mozilla's SVG implementation is as complete as Mozilla's CSS1 implementation, it'll be included in standard builds.
As for the 'progress being hampered', they certainly don't mean the progress of new recommendations... I think they mean the progress of the format becoming a widely used Web graphics standard. Which is currently hampered not by incompatibilities between implementations, but because Adobe's is the only game in town and it's not a very widely installed plugin. SVG will only really have a benefit over Flash etc. when it has integrated browser support in IE (and Mozilla of course - with luck, when Mozilla gains full SVG support, it'll be enough to shame Microsoft into developing it, presuming they're not already doing so).
SVG isn't making very much progress on the Web, where it is barely used at all (no surprise, as these things take time: not many people were using PNG in 1997 either, which is about the comparable date). It is, reportedly, making progress in other areas such as mobile phones. On the Web, it's still nowhere.