Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Answer: because there are plenty of things you simply can't express in SVG with its current level of support across browsers.

e.g. no blend mode except "normal" really works reliably across browsers yet. And just a reminder: it's 2013, everyone.

Next question...

Well, many websites uses simple graphics, simple logos... It's 2013 - yes, and nowadays simple, flat, design is modern, rather than graphics with a lot of effects, that was modern in the past, IMHO.

But I agree with your argument regarding to something is not properly - yes, that can be the reason why people don't see the whole thing as reliable

Pretty much exactly this-- advanced stuff only express-able in Bitmap format (such as photos, complex patterns, blending modes, etc) cannot be represented in SVG. That is, unless you use a Bitmap embedded in the SVG, but then what's the point? It's just simpler to use a bitmap format right now.

no blend mode except "normal" really works reliably across browsers yet

Compared to what? What alternative does reliably have blend?

There isn't one (except I'm sure someone's going to pop up here and say flash).

So the only alternative is something that's been pre-composited down to pixels for you, probably in a png.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact