On 31 May 2015 at 16:25, Tavmjong Bah <tavmjong@...8...> wrote:
I understand that the hopes from several years ago, to have aworking SVG animation tool by the release of Inkscape 1.0, have now gone by the wayside (I guess for lack of anyone interested enough to do it). But I wonder, if Inkscape had even an experimental SVG animation model, based on SMIL (along with a new UI which probably would be needed, afaiu) if Google would still want to deprecate SMIL?
Inkscape has never even had an experimental animation model. Creating an animation editor is much more complex that just rendering an animation.
If Inkscape never even had an experimental implementation for it, the loss of SMIL would be relatively small from a development perspective. The tooling would just need to focus on CSS and/or Web animations instead. For Inkscape users this probably doesn't make any or a very small difference. The UI should hide the technical implementation.
But I'm definitely curious about what will be lost of SMIL, whichthat new CSS can't replicate, or conversely, if this new CSS will have any new abilities that SMIL doesn't have. And I'm curious what our Inkscape community thinks about this apparently pending deprecation in Chrome? (Because I guess Mozilla/Firefox will follow suit, since IE already stopped supporting it, some versions back. And that makes it seem like a sad day for animation with Inkscape.)
SMIL is somewhat simpler to write. SMIL can animate attributes as well as properties. The biggest loss, in my mind, is the ability to animate paths.
Features like path animations will (need to) be brought up as feature for the other specifications then. As I saw there were already some people complaining about that within the Google thread.
Sebastian