Comparison of the designing capabilities of SVG and HTML
Here I show the result of an interesting test:
I have rebuild my ages old 1. SVG test page again, this time using HTML!
I reproduced all images and links, however this time without the animation and without those nice thingies that appear on mousing-over the lefthand-side menue.
Those rollovers had been made using SVG only, no scripting (as it would be required in this file here).
Right, in order to make the comparison as serious as possible, I - for a short time - took the code for those mouseover-thingies out of the SVG file in order to compare the filesize of the SVG file and this HTML version:
The size of the SVG file is only a fraction of that of the HTML version!
8 KB35 KB
Compressed (to .svgz) the file would even have only 2 KB!
Furthermore the SVG version allows you to make changes at any time without a big fuzz. Graphics (and text in graphics) can quickly be varied or updated, without having to use Photoshop again or even to make up completely new HTML table structures.
While rebuilding the HTML version of the SVG file I was constantly swearing. Jeez, how much faster, easier and funnier it is to work with SVG!!!
One of the advantages of HTML, though, is the possiblity to create table cells with dynamic width and to align the included text. Whereas in SVG files you work with fixed coordinates for the text and dynamical text-wrapping is not (yet) possible.
This will, though, hopefully change with SVG's version 1.2 and the upcoming Adobe SVG Viewer number 6.
I should use this occasion to point out to another disadvantage of SVG:
The rendering of SVG files is highly demanding for your PC's processor. If e.g. your computer only has a 200 MHz processor, you could be seriously annoyed at the long waiting period with bigger SVG files. On the other hand, SVG files are serious fun on a 1500 MHz processor.
The advantage of speedy SVG files as opposed to big HTML files with images is therefore not valid on very old computers.
«« German version
This file was initially written in 2001,
updated in March 2003
translated to English in July 2003.