D could catch this wave: web assembly

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 19 June 2015 at 16:23:00 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
> You want reasons I dislike SVG?  I can address a few different 
> levels.
>
> It's unbelievably complex even if you reduce it to just the 
> still-graphics parts.  This means implementing a renderer it is 
> not even close to trivial (you need to support a huge chunk of

Yes, it is not for end-user renderers. However, you can reduce 
most of the useful subset of SVG to paths and transforms.

> Even just rendering it for output on a device has poor 
> performance

That really depends on the engine, of course, as well as the 
composition of the graphics, what kind of animation etc. If you 
know how the composition affects the renderer you can get decent 
performance. You obviously should not use filter effects on 
animations.

> It only supports linear gradients, which makes it basically 
> useless for artistic work unless you live in a "Modern" bubble.

Oh well, what you call "Modern" I would call timeless. I think 
most logos can be done well in it.

>  There's no support for variable stroke width.  You can only 
> define one stroke and one fill, so if you want to composite 
> those things, you need to do a lot of duplication.  On top of 
> that, blending can only be done through filters (which are 
> milquetoast at best).  And text in SVG is...ugh, let's not even 
> start.

Text in SVG works fine. I've used it for buttons.

I think they probably should've left out the filters and stuck 
with aspect that better suits CSS-theming though.

> SVG is somewhat useful if you only need simple diagrams with 
> solid colours and you don't trust PNG for some reason.

SVG is perfectly fine for any kind of decals, logos, buttons. PNG 
is way more tedious.