To be fair, it is your opinion that it is not right, unless you have a source that states otherwise. I vividly recall hearing one of the Adobe folks make the statement during a presentation online. I will add that this was a good 6 months ago (thus in beta) and could be a feature extent which didn't come to full bloom. I will see if I can dig up a more "credible" source for you.
Charles P. On 4/2/07, Muzak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>My understanding is that the big reason for this feature is >>>to be able to bring complex animations into Flex. > > Can you site where you heard that? I have never heard of that before. > Well, that's because it's not correct ;-) Flex doesn't have a class that transforms xml into animation, which Flash CS3 does have. That doesn't mean an animator class can't/won't be written for Flex though.
_______________________________________________ [email protected] To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
