<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL formatting" type="text/xsl" href="http://blog.mozbox.org/feed/rss2/xslt" ?><rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
  <title>blog.mozbox.org - Open Mashups Studio  - Comments</title>
  <link>http://blog.mozbox.org/</link>
  <description>Paul Rouget about some Mozilla stuff</description>
  <language>en</language>
  <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:46:58 +0200</pubDate>
  <copyright></copyright>
  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
  <generator>Dotclear</generator>
  
    
    
    <item>
    <title>Open Mashups Studio - Fabrice</title>
    <link>http://blog.mozbox.org/post/2008/05/05/Open-Mashups-Studio#c8128573</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:md5:f6e031e7de2b5b1dbfb101dd82cb00e5</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 08:26:11 +0200</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Fabrice</dc:creator>
    
    <description>&lt;p&gt;SVG dynamic performance is OK. It's a very different beast from HTML, and I
don't think it would have been better if I used floating divs/canvas to do
it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And there are SVG features like zooming that would be hard to
emulate....&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However I found that using opacity slows down rendering to a crawl. I also
try to only have &amp;quot;live&amp;quot; the displayed elements, and create temporary ones on
the fly.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  </item>
      
    
    <item>
    <title>Open Mashups Studio - Question</title>
    <link>http://blog.mozbox.org/post/2008/05/05/Open-Mashups-Studio#c8128043</link>
    <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:md5:234bd6cbfb82fc10519ab26eadcfe73a</guid>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 04:11:19 +0200</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Question</dc:creator>
    
    <description>&lt;p&gt;Awesome.&lt;br /&gt;
What about the performance of SVG? It's much slower than HTML in my mind. Any
way, static SVG is fast enough.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  </item>
      
</channel>
</rss>