I think this way to optimize rsl will don't work with persistent framework caching, because flasplayer need swz file for framework caching, like showed in this topic:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/message/90015 Alex, thanks for answer, i my first case, the client who payed for tests with flex, i can use stealth download and it will works fine. In other website, smaller, i think this is not possible because my idea is create all frontend in flex (for better experience for user). Will adobe don't put flex framework inside flashplayer? --- In [email protected], "tim_buntel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for the welcome, Douglas. It's nice to be here! > > Persistent Framework Caching, aka RSLs, actually reduce the size of > your applications. And, you guessed it, there's a video and feature > write-up about RSLs at > http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/Flex_3:Feature_Introductions#Pers > istent_Framework_Caching_.28also_known_as_framework_RSLs_or_cross- > domain_RSLs.2C_Updated_for_Beta_2.29 There's a section in the > article called "How to create an optimized RSL" that documents how to > reduce the size of your RSL by over 50%. > > Tim > > --- In [email protected], "danielvlopes" <danielvlopes@> > wrote: > > > > The terminology is framework caching and this generate a huge file > > with 500kb and all this giant file must be load before your swf. > > > > --- In [email protected], "Brendan Meutzner" <bmeutzner@> > > wrote: > > > > > > I can't remember the exact terminology for it, but one of the > goals > > > for Flex generated swfs involves caching the common framework > files on > > > client machines, to avoid repeated download, thus cutting the swf > size > > > drastically. I'm sure Ales or Matt can speak more to this > feature. > > > > > > Brendan > > > > > > > > > On 10/15/07, Douglas Knudsen <douglasknudsen@> wrote: > > > > ugh take a look at the release notes for FB3 Beta 2 and be sure > > you are > > > > looking at the released version of your SWFs, not the debug > > versions that > > > > are generated by default only now. > > > > > > > > DK > > > > > > > > On 10/15/07, danielvlopes <danielvlopes@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hello, i create a big project in flex using modules, RSLs > and > > etc... > > > > > This project is real client, and he accept test flex in you > website. > > > > > Everything works fine (ignoring the 500kb framework file it is > > > > > necessary for users to access the site.) > > > > > > > > > > Now i thinking use flex in small projects like simple > websites, > > in old > > > > > versions of flex, like 3beta 1 or flex 2 swf files are > smaller, like > > > > > 200kb or 130kb (not really small but acceptable). But now, > with > > beta 2 > > > > > simple files came to 400kb. > > > > > > > > > > I becoming thinking i waste my time learning flex and waste > the > > money > > > > > of my client testing flex in your app, I am already thinking > about > > > > > redo the whole project in ruby on rails and ajax. > > > > > > > > > > If adobe and flex team does not begin to worry about the size > of > > swfs > > > > > believe deeply that the flex will not last for a long > time .... And > > > > > certainly I will have wasted time and money. > > > > > > > > > > :( > > > > > > > > > > This is the code i use for test size of swf: > > > > > > > > > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> > > > > > <mx:Application xmlns:mx="http://www.adobe.com/2006/mxml"; > > > > > layout="absolute"> > > > > > <mx:DataGrid/> > > > > > <mx:TileList/> > > > > > <mx:TextInput/> > > > > > <mx:TextArea/> > > > > > <mx:Form/> > > > > > <mx:FormItem/> > > > > > <mx:Button/> > > > > > <mx:ViewStack/> > > > > > <mx:Image/> > > > > > </mx:Application> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Douglas Knudsen > > > > http://www.cubicleman.com > > > > this is my signature, like it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Brendan Meutzner > > > http://www.meutzner.com/blog/ > > > > > >
