> Well, as I say, we mostly have just a line of code in our > .fla that > says: > #include "Stuff.as" > and then use DWMX to write Stuff.as and all the other .as > files that it > includes. Everything can be done in pure text mode. Then > you just > "publish" to .swf using the Flash MX tool.
I think what I'm really looking for is for there to be a way to do a lot (if not all) of that remaining stage work with the AS file. It doesn't necessarily need to be "hideously easy" the way a lot of stuff is in CF. As a matter of fact I'd be okay with it being rather complex. ActionScript is a sub-set of JavaScript and that's okay, so if I had a way of creating items on the stage and importing vector graphics from say Illustrator and tweening them all using Flash, I'd be really really really impressed. It would have to be documented differently than all the documentation I've seen for Flash as of yet in order for me to really feel comfortable getting into flash heavily. > Admittedly, some component and layout issues are much > easier to achieve > in the authoring tool than in pure ActionScript but the > work you do in > the authoring environment can be minimal. >> documentation for Flash MX as difficult to use as the >> interface itself >> (and >> it's easily broken by changes to the JVM on the host >> machine), so I >> don't > I don't follow you - what has Flash MX got to do with the > JVM? Much of the documentation that comes with the Flash MX tool (the part with the search form), is a separate desktop application written in Java -- which worked on my machine for about 4 days and then stopped working all together as a result of some unbeknownst change to my JVM that I never could figure out how to repair. I even tried uninstalling and reinstalling Flash to no avail. Imho documentation is too important to allow its primary source to be in a format that is as prone to problems as that. Imho I should be looking at html and or PDF or even windows Help files (although I realize those are probably useless on other operating systems and so they're less useful than pdf and html since they would result in duplicated work) _long_ before I ever hit anything that's even remotely tied to Java in any way. >> I suppose for starters, this url needs to not produce a >> 404 error: >> >> http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flashmxdocs/dochome.jsp > Well, we don't have livedocs for every product yet, see: > http://livedocs.macromedia.com/ Oh okay -- so it's coming and I'm just a bum 'cause it didn't occur to me to check the root domain. :) Thanks. :) > for what is available today. We're looking at putting > other documentation online (although the LiveDocs system > really needs a bit of an overhaul before we can do that!). There's a feeling I'm familiar with. :) >> default authoring environment, if for no other reason >> than that it forces the documentation to be changed to >. cater to us cf developers who are used to > Of course, you also need to consider that there are about > three times as many Flash users as there are ColdFusion > users but your point is well taken - "Flash developer" > documentation will likely be structured very differently > from "Flash designer" documentation. Yea, it's really all about the semantics and getting into the headspace of the "developer" vs. the headspace of the "designer" -- cf / flash / html or otherwise. >> Again, playing devil's advocate, I think the problem that >> some CF developers have had with Contribute (myself not >> included, so I'm sure I'm not really speaking for anyone >> in particular), is that it's seen as a waste of resources >> which might have otherwise been spent on more ColdFusion >> Server development. > Well, the Contribute team is a totally separate group of > people to the CF server team, with a different skill set. > If we hadn't had those people build Contribute, they > certainly wouldn't have worked on CF. And there's only a > certain number of people you can reasonably have all > working on the same code base at any one time if you want > to stay efficient. The argument that Contribute took > resources away from CF server is, frankly, > a very silly one indeed! Bottlenecks -- yep... Did I forget to mention that in my last message? I had meant to. s. isaac dealey 954-776-0046 new epoch http://www.turnkey.to lead architect, tapestry cms http://products.turnkey.to tapestry api is opensource http://www.turnkey.to/tapi certified advanced coldfusion 5 developer http://www.macromedia.com/v1/handlers/index.cfm?ID=21816 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
