SVG art support?

[NovaYoshi]

I've been doing all my art so far in SVG format, but I've had to downgrade it to PNG for uploading it my FurAffinity gallery. This has worked out fine, but lately I've been making interactive and animated SVGs, to give me a way to have animated vector art without being forced to use a proprietary format like Flash. These SVGs can't really be converted to PNG or anything else FA will accept, so I need a way to upload them.

I do remember the old arguments about the reasons FA doesn't allow tracker music files, because not everyone has software to play them, and that they don't want to use the Java module player engine, but SVG is supported in all the major browsers ( except Failsplorer, due to its developers not caring about web standards ) so there's not really a reason *not* to support it

 

[Slyck]

I second this.

Also, Internet Exploiter 8 can display SVG files...

 

[Firehazard]

I second this.

Also, Internet Exploiter 8 can display SVG files...

It can? I heard they were "working on it" for IE 9, which I assumed meant 8 didn't have that. I bet it's very limited support, like it can only work on still images or something.

 

[NovaYoshi]

It can? I heard they were "working on it" for IE 9, which I assumed meant 8 didn't have that. I bet it's very limited support, like it can only work on still images or something.

Until then, you could probably just use JavaScript that's *outside* the actual SVG file to animate it.

 

[Firehazard]

Um... how would that work exactly? You can't put custom JavaScript in a submission file, and there are a million good reasons why.

 

[NovaYoshi]

Um... how would that work exactly? You can't put custom JavaScript in a submission file, and there are a million good reasons why.

I was referring to SVG animations in general under Internet Explorer, but yes, you can embed JavaScript inside SVG files. It's a lot more widely supported than SMIL.

 

[Slyck]

It can? I heard they were "working on it" for IE 9, which I assumed meant 8 didn't have that. I bet it's very limited support, like it can only work on still images or something.

Meh. All I did was fire up IE and get an SVG off of Google Images. I might be wrong.

 

[Smelge]

The question is, what is the advantage of this format over the other more standard ones? For example, I've never heard of SVG.

 

[NovaYoshi]

The question is, what is the advantage of this format over the other more standard ones? For example, I've never heard of SVG.

The main thing is that it stores a list of drawing instructions instead of what pixels go where. Because of this, you can take SVG art, then rotate/skew/resize it without losing any detail whatsoever.

Also, if standard-ness were a problem, I'm not sure FurAffinity would even allow formats like SWF.

 

[someonesomewhere]

SVG is somewhat similiar to flash, but i think it has a lot better drawing tools available, most of which are free. It also works with other web standards; For example, you can put html in svg.

 

[Smelge]

The main thing is that it stores a list of drawing instructions instead of what pixels go where. Because of this, you can take SVG art, then rotate/skew/resize it without losing any detail whatsoever.

Also, if standard-ness were a problem, I'm not sure FurAffinity would even allow formats like SWF.

But ideally, it doesn't need to be rotated skewed or resized once on FA. The thumbnail is created automatically and that's always jpeg. But as the system stands, there would be no advantage over anything else.

SVG is somewhat similiar to flash, but i think it has a lot better drawing tools available, most of which are free. It also works with other web standards; For example, you can put html in svg.

Again though, the programs that output in SVG are so few and far between, you might get a few out of the entirety of the site. Unless it became a pretty major standard, it's not worth the effort to the site guys to allow it.

And just because it makes drawing it a little easier, you can still save it in a different format. Having read up on SVG on Wikipedia, it sounds like people draw in SVG just to go "Look at me, I can draw in SVG".

 

[someonesomewhere]

The reason people use svg is because some prefer vector graphics to raster, and many agree svg is the best option for vectors. The reason one can't just convert to other format is the wish for interactivity; It could be thought of as a replacement to flash.


One of the reasons we should accept an open standard like svg is competition it creates. Currently flash monopolizes vector animation, and many who want to create content suffer from it's flawed content creation tools. Allowing svg would give such people (w3c recommended) alternative, and possibly if other sites make such decicions forces flash to improve from it's IMHO pathetic state; I personally find editing svg with notepad to be more intuitive and easier than working with flash.

 

[Firehazard]

Still, the problem is that this format is not universally supported. To quote Wikipedia: "As of 2010[update], only Opera, Safari and Google Chrome supported embedding via the <img> HTML element." Notice what's not on that list: Not just Internet Explorer, but Firefox as well. You can't just plunk an SVG into a page the way you can with a raster image.

 

[NovaYoshi]

But ideally, it doesn't need to be rotated skewed or resized once on FA. The thumbnail is created automatically and that's always jpeg. But as the system stands, there would be no advantage over anything else.

Am I the only one who likes to be able to view a gallery with everything the same size, then?

And just because it makes drawing it a little easier, you can still save it in a different format. Having read up on SVG on Wikipedia, it sounds like people draw in SVG just to go "Look at me, I can draw in SVG".

Please tell me of a different format for art, that's an open standard, which can be interactive. (Though it does sound a lot like my reasons for working on the NES instead of more modern consoles )

Still, the problem is that this format is not universally supported. To quote Wikipedia: "As of 2010[update], only Opera, Safari and Google Chrome supported embedding via the <img> HTML element." Notice what's not on that list: Not just Internet Explorer, but Firefox as well. You can't just plunk an SVG into a page the way you can with a raster image.

On the site side: The methods available for displaying a submission doesn't seem to be a problem, since the site is already handling audio and text submissions, and if those aren't a problem, I don't see why SVG would be much harder.
On the browser side: Yes, but with browsers like Firefox it's in *our* hands to add that support. Having more sites with SVG support would most likely help with the motivation part of that.

 

[Bokracroc]

It also works with other web standards; For example, you can put html in svg.

That totally doesn't sound like a potential security risk/flaw.

 

[Sugar-Coated Cyanide]

SVG is able to support built-in coding with JavaScript and HTML (as well as other languages if I recall correctly). It would never happen as it is a huge security risk. PNG is (currently) the best possible image format that is compatible with pretty much all browsers.

 

[NovaYoshi]

SVG is able to support built-in coding with JavaScript and HTML (as well as other languages if I recall correctly). It would never happen as it is a huge security risk.

It isn't impossible to have it whine and complain when "<script><![CDATA[" and "]]> </script>" sequences are found. (As well as any event triggers)

 

[Sugar-Coated Cyanide]

On the framework that FA is currently built on, yes it is impossible. Besides, even if that were possible, there are always ways around it.

 

[Firehazard]

On the site side: The methods available for displaying a submission doesn't seem to be a problem, since the site is already handling audio and text submissions, and if those aren't a problem, I don't see why SVG would be much harder.

We use a Flash-based widget for audio. So far as I know, there isn't a Flash-based widget that enables SVG support on non-SVG-compliant browsers. But if you know of one, shout it out. It would certainly be a handy tool to have. As for text... it's text. It works for the same reason the comments and journals work. It's not like we're embedding .DOC files right into the webpage.

On the browser side: Yes, but with browsers like Firefox it's in *our* hands to add that support. Having more sites with SVG support would most likely help with the motivation part of that.

Except that in the meantime, we're left with users — probably the majority of them — unable to access that content.