there's a few subtle differences... the main thing is that ufo keeps all the code in the head of the document, and waits for the html to load, then swaps the stuff in - i think it hides the alternate content until the flash is written or until it determines that the user doesn't have flash player.
i think swfobject is a few k smaller in file size as well.
On May 2, 2006, at 3:26 PM, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote: That´s a great discover indeed! :)
I now that would be OT, but just for curiosity sake, as I have never used SWFObject, only UFO... but I guess there aren´t any big differences between them, am I right?
- Marcelo.
On 5/2/06, Aral Balkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hey Geoff,
How cool! :)
IMHO, SWFObject should be included in the next version of Flash in the
default HTML publish.
Aral
Geoff Stearns wrote:
> I just noticed last night that the new adobe.com is using a slightly
> customized version of SWFObject to embed the Flash content.
>
> I knew they were going to use it for some stuff, or at least use some
> of the code and ideas from it, but it was still pretty cool seeing the
> code in there.
>
> http://adobe.com/js/global.js - check it out - search for 'deconcept'
> or 'swfobject' and you'll see it all in there.
>
> Hopefully this will be the start of Adobe embracing (and using) more
> open source projects :)
> <snip>
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
_______________________________________________ osflash mailing list |
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
