On 22 April 2017 at 14:55, David Lang <david@...2429...> wrote:

> SVG appears to be dying. Assuming this is so, I propose to continue SVG
> within the Inkscape community (at least)

well, if you are not proposing abandoning SVG, then why keep arguing the point
that it may be dying? What's the difference between "SVG is not dying" and "SVG
is dying, but we should continue to use it"?

Assuming the SVG standard is dying, then why not try to save it? Take it away from the big companies that are retarding it and bring it into the Inkscape community (at least).

I don't have the answer, but I am raising the idea. Save it by intervention. Take it and extend it.

> *and* take the chance to update
> Inkscape (at least) so that its many design holes are filled.

updating Inkscape can happen regardless.

Well, I am not so sure. I have read many threads where the reason given for not adding features is because they are not in the SVG standard, or are under (interminable) discussion, or some other nice time-sink which leaves them in the cold. (I can't find examples right now.)

> This new SVG would in no way break the older standard, however this is
> achieved.

creating a SVG derivitive is a bad idea, in spite of what you think, there is a
lot of stuff that works with the output of inkscape.

Sure, and there's no reason why Inkscape could not continue to output what this other stuff requires. Clever use of the GUI and some form of "export as" system is not beyond imagination.

Also, if this other stuff freezes in time along with SVG itself, then it will fall out of use.

And what exactly needs to change in SVG to implement the new features you want
in Inkscape? Especially when you consider the need to be portable across all the
platforms that Inkscape is used on (even if you ignore all the platforms that
the resulting svg is used on)

I don't know. Conversation hasn't reached these areas yet. Perhaps it will if we see SVG as our own, rather than some ideal.

let's call the new version SVFree. What the heck.

embedded python isn't an option unless you are going to embed a python
interpreter as well. I'm not going to go back and dig up all the prior posts to
find other suggestions, but you would be far better off just proposing new
features and improvements rather than starting off by claiming that SVG is dying
and therefor we should accept new features. Justify eacy feature by itself.

I hope, by now, that my position is clearer. The main point is this seems to be a crux. We can face facts and intervene in SVG's fate or we can lose all that Inkscape has achieved. (Assuming SVG does not regain a pulse somehow.)