User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031114 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031114 As I saw in several closed bugs, requests to get SMIL 2.0 support in mozilla were denied. I agree SMIL 2.0 is better supported through a plugin like realplayer. XHTML+SMIL however is about extending XHTML with some parts of SMIL (not the whole thing.) The XHTML+SMIL note has been in existance for at least 2 years now: http://www.w3.org/TR/XHTMLplusSMIL/ XHTML+SMIL reuses several technologies already in mozilla. Like CSS for defining layout and XHTML for linking. So I think this is a candidate for implementation in mozilla. XHTML+SMIL is already in IE since version 5.5. Time to catch up ;-) Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
see bug 93321 comment 6 BTW: I thought that IE supports HTML+TIME, not XHTML+SMIL ? See <http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-HTMLplusTIME> and <http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dntime/html/htmltime.asp>
Is this bug about SVG Declarative Animations (in which case it should be renamed) or about XHTML+SMIL support in general (in which case SVG is the wrong component)?
About XHTML+SMIL support in general because it's not specifically about SVG support.
(In reply to comment #3) > About XHTML+SMIL support in general because it's not specifically about SVG support. In that case ... rassigning to browser-general :-)
Assignee: alex → general
Component: SVG → Browser-General
QA Contact: general
That document is a note, not a recommendation. But this would be WONTFIX for the same reasons as bug 93321.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 14 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.