[dojo-contributors] [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: Flash Cross-Site Access Plugin]]

Tom Trenka ttrenka at gmail.com
Tue Oct 21 10:13:58 EDT 2008


>
> Yes, we want to discourage the use of FLAs, since the Flash IDE is not open
> source. Distributing them even as a second option is not very "open
> sourcey".
>
> I do however, use the Flash IDE to debug Deft files all the time (it helps
> with runtime errors). In the Properties tab of an FLA file, insert the main
> AS file of your package as the Document Class. Then make sure the FLA is
> saved relative to that file.
>
>
> So, I'd have to figure out if MXML/Flex can be used to compile a SWF
> targeted at old AS1 style (flash v6) compilation or not. If it can, then I
> could and would certainly want to include that as well.  If not, then this
> might be a point of incompatibility, unfortunately.
>
>
> I'm afraid that's a big problem. MXMLC only compiles Flash version 9 and
> up. I'm also not sure if Adobe licensing would cover an older version of a
> SWF.
>
> However, MTASC does older Flash files (though not newer, AS3 files). And we
> do still support that I believe, since we still have dojox.flash storage. It
> may be depreciated though. Tom may have to tackle this one.
>

The way we've handled this in the past is to write source aimed at MTASC
compilation, and then told people how to get the MTASC compiler.
 However...we decided, with the advent of Deft, that targeting Flash 6 isn't
necessary anymore.  So...

I'd say that if this were part of DTK, the Flash 6 requirement isn't
necessary at all.  Also, this could be pure AS (you don't need MXML for it);
you can compile that with Flex just fine.  We would not want to redistribute
the .FLA file, though the instructions Mike just gave could definitely be
part of the distribution.

regards,
trt



>
> Mike
>
>
>
> -----------------------------
>
> If these concerns prove too difficult to work through, it's certainly
> understandable, and I think having my the flXHR-Dojo plugin at least
> included, with a link/txt-file to where to get the other necessary files
> from my site, would be just fine too.  You're right, the
> http://flxhr.flensed.com/ page would be the right page to direct them to,
> as it has a big prominent link on it for downloading...
>
> Anyway, thanks again for all your help and effort on this.  Let me know
> what they say about the MXML stuff.
>
> --Kyle
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Kris Zyp" <kris at sitepen.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 8:28 PM
> To: "Getify Solutions" <getify at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Fwd: Re: [dojo-contributors] Flash Cross-Site Access Plugin]
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> Kyle,
>
> Here is the response from some of the Dojo folks about the possibility
>
> of including flXHR in Dojo. If you are interested, great, but if not,
>
> I will at least including a link to your plugin in the documentation
>
> for xhrPlugins. Should I link to http://flxhr.flensed.com/, or you
>
> will have a more specific page/download for the plugin?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kris
>
>
> - --
>
> Kris Zyp
>
> SitePen
>
> (503) 806-1841
>
> http://sitepen.com
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
>
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkj36kAACgkQ9VpNnHc4zAy86gCgnvgZ1tbhwDl3gCrqH6jWoZDL
>
> xaQAn0tvw4OBYZHT9DOt9850iOSq+dFx
>
> =MWQ8
>
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *"Getify Solutions, Inc." <getify at gmail.com>
> *Date: *October 18, 2008 2:19:20 PM CDT
> *To: *"Kris Zyp" <kris at sitepen.com>
> *Subject: **flXHR with MXMLC*
>
>
> Hey, something interesting to note.  I just re-compiled the flXHR.swf file
> with MXMLC from Flex 3.1 SDK (no changes to AS code needed, thankfully!)...
> like I had mentioned before, the file it creates *is* ~130 bytes larger than
> the one that the Flash IDE creates.  That's very confusing to me. It might
> have to do with flex framework stuff that mxmlc's default configuration is
> including (font aliasing, etc), so I might be able to tune that down more,
> we'll see.
>
> BUT... here's what's crazy about that.  Despite the slightly larger size,
> the flXHR.swf that MXMLC compiles appears to load/operate MUCH quicker
> (testing only in IE so far) -- like, a very, very noticeable speed increase
> in how quickly it loads and runs!
>
> Compiling the SWF with MXMLC doesn't require any additional project files
> or anything. Just a few config switches in the actual command.  That command
> looks like:
>
> mxmlc -target-player="9.0.124" -default-size 1 1 -use-network
> -default-frame-rate=1 -show-actionscript-warnings=false -output="flXHR.swf"
> Main.as
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to set those options in a custom XML config
> file so they don't need to be on the command-line.  If I can figure that
> out, I'll certainly include that in the distribution to help end-users.
>
> So, anyway, this is a very interesting development, with the improved
> performance.  I'm totally convinced though.  The SWF I distribute now is
> going to be the MXMLC version.  I'll still want to include the .FLA source
> file if a user doesn't have/want-to-use flex SDK command-line compiler.
> They'll just have the caveat that their SWF from the IDE will always be less
> optimal!
>
> ----------------------------
>
> On another note, regarding trying to open-source compile the AS1 of the
> "updateplayer.swf" from CheckPlayer/SWFObject. Unfortunately, MXMLC is
> unable to compile it, as it's only able to deal with AS3.  It seems like
> MTASC might be able to do so, but it's confusing with conflicting
> documentation/info, and so far, everything I've tried gives compilation
> errors with the .AS file.  And I also looked into MING, which should
> apparently be able to compile AS1 SWF's.  However, I wasn't able to figure
> MING out yet.
>
> So, again, this may be a sticking point where we can't get flXHR's files
> directly included in the DojoX build distro. I'm not sure.  What do your
> colleagues think?  Even if so, I think we should easily be able to get the
> flXHR distribution linked to, with the plugin code itself still part of
> DojoX, right? Slightly less ideal that a user will have to go elsewhere to
> download more files, but manageable I would think.
>
> Looking forward to hearing what you and the others think.  Talk with you
> soon.
>
> --Kyle
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org
> http://turtle.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>
>
> Mike Wilcox
> mwilcox at sitepen.com
> http://www.sitepen.com
> work: 650.968.8787 x218
> cell:   214.697.4872
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at dojotoolkit.org
> http://turtle.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20081021/247d19b2/attachment.htm 


More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list