On 20 Oct 2008, at 10:26, kevin mcmonagle wrote:
micheal md wrote:
>>I tend to avoid using anything that needs flash player 9 where
possible and so far I haven't found
anything I needed to do that really needed actionscript 3
How about flv?
IIRC flv came in with Flash 8
--
Rick Leco
micheal md wrote:
>>I tend to avoid using anything that needs flash player 9 where
possible and so far I haven't found
anything I needed to do that really needed actionscript 3
How about flv?
-best
kevin
***
List Guidelin
Kerry I agree with you there - while 99% of computers online may have
access
to flash 2 or 3 some higher (of course) I think that we would be extremely
hard pressed to find a majority of online machines with flash above flash
8.
Myself, a web developer, only has flash 8 on my machine (I don't c
Webb, KerryA wrote:
Johan Douma wrote:
Flash is on 99.9% of the computers.
Which is the sort of claim made often by Adobe.
But, if we're talking about a recent version of Flash on 99.9% of
computers, that's a different matter.
I think that's somewhat unfair. Adobe go out of their way to pr
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 1:25 PM, Breton Slivka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But on the other side, I'm not sure how many people use add ons like "no
>> flash" or "no script" and there's no way to find out.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Johan
>>
>
> Yes, there IS a way to find out: Compare server logs with whi
> But on the other side, I'm not sure how many people use add ons like "no
> flash" or "no script" and there's no way to find out.
>
> Cheers,
> Johan
>
Yes, there IS a way to find out: Compare server logs with which people
actually executed the "analytics" script. I just haven't seen any
impleme
0434 728 267
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Webb, KerryA
> Sent: Monday, 20 October 2008 8:09 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: RE: [WSG] F
Return Receipt
Your RE: [WSG] Flash replace Javascript in Future?
document
EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Webb, KerryA
Sent: Monday, 20 October 2008 8:09 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Flash replace Javascript in Future?
Johan Douma wrote:
> Flash is on 99.9% of the computers.
Which is the sort of claim made often by Adobe.
But,
Johan Douma wrote:
> Flash is on 99.9% of the computers.
Which is the sort of claim made often by Adobe.
But, if we're talking about a recent version of Flash on 99.9% of
computers, that's a different matter.
Kerry
---
This
> On 17/10/2008, at 12:27 AM, Charles Ling wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys/Gals,
>>
>> I would like to get some opinion from you all, that would Flash 10 or ++
>> will replace
>> JavaScript in the future? According to this blog :
>> http://ajaxian.com/archives/flash-
>> 10-and-the-bad-news-for-javascript-int
I don't know of the appropriateness here (etiquette) being a newbie...
though Adobe's agenda is to make Flash an entire environment within
which to work... AKA - Air
It is very neat and you may find of interest the Flex developer
website found here... http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/
Ado
Flex is terribly brittle and has very strange conventions.
I don't see flash replacing javascript.
Maybe will all be using flash browsers one day.
On 18-Oct-08, at 11:01 AM, Simon Josephson wrote:
I don't know of the appropriateness here (etiquette) being a newbie...
though Adobe's agenda is
Don¹t hold your breath for ogg support in all browsers.
I imagine microsoft will be more interested in pushing silverlight than
flash or ogg.
Audio and video is a key front in the next generation of browser wars, so it
won¹t be that simple.
As you note, Flash offers some useful stuff that¹s not
Read the story on that page carefully. What has happened is that flash
10 has increased restrictions over what features within the flash
plugin can be invoked via javascript. This only applies to one
specific feature (file uploads), and effects virtually no other flash
features. It does not effe
I think you misunderstood the article big-time. It's saying that Flash
10 is planned to not support DHTML scripting access, which means you
won't be able to control a flash video via Javascript. That just means
that a lot of interfaces where Flash is *not* currently sufficient
they introduce a v
I don't see flash becoming a dominant technology in the future. It's
definitly not going to replace javascript.
It wouldn't actually surprise me if it is going to die off really slowly...
Only to be used in really specific cases.
Flash gets used a lot today because the flash video codec is good an
Read the story on that page carefully. What has happened is that flash
10 has increased restrictions over what features within the flash
plugin can be invoked via javascript. This only applies to one
specific feature (file uploads), and effects virtually no other flash
features. It does not effect
Charles Ling wrote:
I would like to get some opinion from you all, that would Flash 10 or ++
will replace JavaScript in the future?
According to this blog :
http://ajaxian.com/archives/flash-10-and-the-bad-news-for-javascript-interaction.
I'm not entirely sure Christian's right that Flash 10 S
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Charles Ling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Guys/Gals,
>
> I would like to get some opinion from you all, that would Flash 10 or ++
> will replace JavaScript in the future?
> According to this blog :
> http://ajaxian.com/archives/flash-10-and-the-bad-news-for-javas
20 matches
Mail list logo
