Hi,
don't know if it helps, but for example ._url might yield something
different in flash 9 then in flash 8.
Which means the resulting path in 9 is different from that in 8, which might
in turn cause content to break.
Not saying that was the problem here, but it might well be.
greetz
JC
On
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_04157
Does this help?
M
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ammon Lauritzen
Sent: 06 October 2006 00:01
To: Flashcoders mailing list
Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] flv not
I notice that you are using: so.addParam(wmode, transparent);
Do you need that? I've heard that the wmode paramater can do strange things to
some browsers?
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 10/5/2006 at 1:49 PM Ammon Lauritzen wrote:
Ok, simple issue really, and I seem to have found
On 10/6/06, Hans Wichman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
don't know if it helps, but for example ._url might yield something
different in flash 9 then in flash 8.
Which means the resulting path in 9 is different from that in 8, which might
in turn cause content to break.
Not saying that was the problem
On 10/6/06, Mike Mountain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_04157
Does this help?
That might have helped, but the problem wasn't with loading the SWF.
It was with the SWF in turn loading the FLV. We had the following
structure:
something.html
On 10/6/06, Jim Berkey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I notice that you are using: so.addParam(wmode, transparent);
Do you need that? I've heard that the wmode paramater can do strange things to
some browsers?
Yeah, we did need the transparent because of the skin we were using
for our player. We
Ammon Lauritzen wrote:
Ok, simple issue really, and I seem to have found evidence of other
people experiencing it as well - just no answers posted to their pleas
for help :)
When people say it dont work and others know it does, it's hard for
others to help. Normal troubleshooting helps more
On 10/5/06, John Dowdell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're using a JavaScript routine to write the tags. When you do a test
file with straight OBJECT/EMBED markup, then do you see that content in
that browser? That's the quickest way to start finding where the
difference is.
I'm sorry, I thought
On 10/5/06, Ammon Lauritzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sorry, I thought I was clearer than that. By without swfobject I
meant that I had also tried manually as well:
And yes, now that I look back on it, I realise that my poor attempt at
humor might not have parsed very well visually... but
i thought it was funny.
On Oct 5, 2006, at 5:43 PM, Ammon Lauritzen wrote:
On 10/5/06, Ammon Lauritzen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sorry, I thought I was clearer than that. By without
swfobject I
meant that I had also tried manually as well:
And yes, now that I look back on it, I
Ammon Lauritzen wrote:
On 10/5/06, John Dowdell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're using a JavaScript routine to write the tags. When you do a test
file with straight OBJECT/EMBED markup, then do you see that content in
that browser? That's the quickest way to start finding where the
difference
On 10/5/06, John Dowdell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you can't see other SWF in that browser, then that's a clue.
Sigh. And here I was wasting my time trying to be polite to you. YES I
could see other SWF's in that browser. Sheesh.
Anyways. Resolution to the problem has been achieved. In
12 matches
Mail list logo
