4 ms·

This is the official statement from the Chrome team announcing the suspension: > We firmly believe that SMIL is not in the best long-term interests of the open

This is the official statement from the Chrome team announcing the suspension: > We firmly believe that SMIL is not in the best long-term interests of the open web platform for several reasons: > * There is no clear path towards broad cross-browser support. > * The vendors which support SMIL have implementations that continue to vary widely, even after more than a decade of support. > * There are high-quality cross-platform replacement features on the horizon. https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/5o0yiO440LM%5B126-150%5D https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink... That still sounds very "obsolete" to me. CSS animations also solve the performance problem because they can be GPU accelerated.

jmiskovic 7y ago
The SVG + CSS is really clumsy combination. The SVG exists outside web technologies as vector image format, where CSS would be horrible choice. The combination of overly verbose XML and inadequate CSS, each with its own idiosyncrasies creates too much mental overhead for developers. Looking at some online examples, I would hate to work on project that uses this combination. There is also JS animation option which has many flaws. I guess it is impossible to accelerate on GPU, it forces imperative instead of declarative animation style and you have to execute someone's code in order to show graphics/animation. I don't think SMIL (or even SVG) is perfect, but it is still the best option for open vector graphics standard. Maybe a much smaller subset would be something all mayor players could agree to support? The transpiler to shader language would be a good solution for performance issues.