Talk:Comparison of layout engines (Scalable Vector Graphics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

WebCore needs updating[edit]

The recently released Safari 3.0 Public Beta has support for SVG... does anybody know the details as to which modules are supported? --Shadowlink1014 03:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've updated the WebCore data in the table using the new link under references. I can't find anything newer though -- the status probably has been updated since. --Shadowlink1014 20:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

KSVG no longer developed?[edit]

I've just tidied up a few things outside the tables, mostly adding a "Footnotes" section. I noticed that http://svg.kde.org/ hasn't been updated since 2005-08-20, and didn't find any more recent code in its subversion repository, so I said in a footnote that "KSVG seems to be inactive as of 2007." (I'd love to be proved wrong about that.) Cheers, CWC 02:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

see http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/ksvg-devel/2007-June/000514.html --Hhielscher 16:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah-hah! That makes perfect sense! (Excerpt: "as far as I know the ksvg developers are currently contributing mainly to the Apple Webkit project".) Thanks, Hhielscher. CWC 00:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
More here. Excerpt:
Don't worry though, this work will go into KDE somehow since khtml and webkit are a lot alike.
Good news. Perhaps someone who follows KDE more closely than I do could edit this article and KSVG accordingly? Thanks, CWC 10:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

What about other layout engines ?[edit]

Why can't we find the plugins layout engines in the tables (Batik, Adobe SVG Viewer, ...) ? They are more serious renderers than (most of) the browsers' native layout engines. Any objection to the add ? --Fenring 14:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

None at all. Possibly the page should be moved to "Comparison of SVG renderers". In fact, I was surprised not to find librsvg here - particularly as librsvg is what Wikimedia uses for SVG rendering. I'm fixing up the SVG section of the MediaWiki manual: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Image_Administration#SVG . - David Gerard (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
You mean renaming the article ? Yes, some of us are thinking about renaming the "Comparison of layout engines (...)" series articles. Do you know any source that shows the status of the librsvg implementation ? --Fenring (talk) 21:27, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
ASV, Batik, Prince and Renesis had been added with data I found on the pages. What plkugins/player do we have which aren't in this list? Mabdul (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
librsvg as David Gerard suggested. Would it be interesting to add editors (Inkscape, Illustrator, Corel, ...) ? --Fenring (talk) 18:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
you're right: but there are the docs? I can't find any docs, whether on gnome npor of sf or the official homepage...Mabdul (talk) 04:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I found enough work for the next few weeks ^^ The point is: Shall we split up the article? If I/somebody else add a few more layout engines/plugins/etc. the page become very big... I think that the editors are important to add. They are on my list, but they have a very low priority. Mabdul (talk) 11:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
I think Trident, Tasman and iCab should be removed as they aren't svg renderers. We'll add them if they start to support svg. And I eventually think the editors should be compared in another article, comparing their capabilities of producing SVG instead of rendering, which is different. --Fenring (talk) 12:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

incomplete article[edit]

ok, we need somebody who can add the rest of the "tags" which are used in the svg-language. i don't know them, but i can add tem for the rest of the other browsers/plugins if i search for them ;) but i need the empty tablesMabdul (talk) 01:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Layout engines vs Libraries and plugins[edit]

Why make the distinction between "Layout engines" and "Libraries and plugins". Can't we consider Gecko as a library too ? Aren't ASVG and batik layout engines ? The fact these layout engines are include in some browsers or not, can be plugged in or not, ... is not very notable in this article, imho. --Fenring (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

mmh, on that point of fiew you're right... I will sleep about this... Mabdul (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


Remove DENG, eSVG[edit]

These engines don't appear to have been developed for many years, and there is very little documentation available or data entered. --Gyrobo (talk) 20:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

There is a discussion going on at Talk:Comparison of layout engines (Cascading Style Sheets)#Adding new engines regarding which engines should be added to/removed from the comparison pages. Requesting the participation of any interested parties. --Gyrobo (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
DENG was removed 2010-02-22. Last Version with the DENG-information can found at [1]
mabdul 15:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
The last revision to contain eSVG is 2010-03-20.
--Gyrobo (talk) 20:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


SVG as background-image[edit]

I meant as html background-image that is allowed by spec. but I think at that moment nobody has it included... mabdul 16:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, now I see what you were talking about. But I think that's been completely deprecated in favor of CSS background images, and wouldn't really be used.
--Gyrobo (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
please read the blog entry and comments by jeff schiller at his blog mabdul 17:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I believe he meant including SVG in HTML using the CSS background-image property:
--Gyrobo (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
lalala... *g* Ok, I should read all of that. was reading different things with watching youtube videos :D mabdul 18:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Cool. --Gyrobo (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Comparison of web browser engines which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:44, 7 September 2012 (UTC)