[Portland] SVG support?

[Ed Schofield]

On 5/23/07, Jon Phillips <jon at rejon.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 09:04 +0200, Peter Åstrand wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 May 2007, Bastian, Waldo wrote:
> >
> > > Testing showed that the various linux desktop environments do not
> > > support SVG icons very consistently and as such it can not be guaranteed
> > > that an SVG icon will be rendered correctly or at all. I suggest to
> > > install pre-rendered PNG's in various sizes instead.
> >
> > I don't understand this logic. I want to do both. Why should we omit SVG
> > support in xdg-utils just because some systems doesn't yet support it
> > properly?
> >
> > If we believe that SVG is something nice to have, we should do "our part".
> > It's also a chicken-and-egg problem: If noone ships SVG:s, perhaps because
> > xdg-utils doesn't allow this, it's no surprise that desktop environments
> > ignore their SVG problems.
> >
> > In any case, in the end, it should be up to the users of xdg-utils,
> > that is packagers, to decide if they want to ship SVG:s or not.
> >
> > So can you please re-add the SVG support?
>
> I concur on this. I think this is wise and forward thinking...let the
> packagers deal with the specifics...

I agree with this too.

Which desktop environments did the testing indicate to have
problematic SVG support? Have their developers been notified?

-- Ed