Apologies for how long this email became, but I was reading around on the trusty wikipedia and wanted to try to clear up some things about the "success" of the existing web standards. I don't want this to come off as too much of a rant, but it proably will.
Let's take a look at the history of CSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSS): CSS level 1: November 4, 1997 CSS level 2: May 12, 1998 CSS level 3: began 1998, still unfinished A brief excerpt: The CSS Working Group began tackling issues that had not been addressed with CSS level 1, resulting in the creation of CSS level 2 on November 4, 1997. It was published as a W3C Recommendation on May 12, 1998. *CSS level 3, which was started in 1998, is still under development as of 2008*. *In 2005 the CSS Working Groups decided to enforce the requirements for standards more strictly. This meant that already published standards like CSS 2.1, CSS 3 Selectors and CSS 3 Text were pulled back from Candidate Recommendation to Working Draft level.* And if you really want to have fun look at the half-assed implementation of CSS across the many browsers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_(CSS). It's been 10 years since CSS 2 was written (10 years!) and yet there still isn't even consistent implementation of that. And CSS 3 implementation is a joke. Maybe HTML is better, let's look at that ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML#Version_history_of_the_standard): HTML 2: 1995 HTML 3.2 recommendation: January, 1997 HTML 4 recommendation: December, 1997 HTML 5 working draft: January 2008 (10 years!) Hmm, maybe we can look at ECMAScript, the standard controlling JavaScript development (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript) ECMAScript 1: June 1997 ECMAScript 2: June 1998 ECMAScript 3: December 1999 Added E4X to ECMAScript: June 2004 ECMAScript 4: scrapped ECMAScript Harmony: in development And now, finally, we'll look at the timeline of Flash/ActionScript: Flash Player 2: 1997 Flash Player 3: 1998 Flash Player 4: May, 1999 Flash Player 5: August 2000 ActionScript 1: September, 2000 Flash Player 6: March 2002 Flash Player 7: September 2003 ActionScript 2: September 2003 Flash Player 8: August 2005 Flah Player 9: June 2006 ActionScript 3: June 2006 Flash Player 10: October 2008 So for literally the past 10 years the standards bodies haven't been able to release a single completed specification. That goes for HTML, CSS, and ECMASCript (the closest would be the draft of the unimplemented HTML 5 that was released a year ago). The entire "standards-based web" is running on stuff that was written before the dot-com bubble burst! Now look at how Flash has progressed since 1999. That includes the complete evolution of ActionScript all the way from the very first version to the AS3 (including the recent Vector, etc enhancements that come with Player 10). The entire evolution of AS3 occurred after the last ECMAScript spec was written. CSS 3 started development in 1998 and still isn't finished. In that same time period we went from Flash Player 3 to 10. I'm not holding my breath for anything new coming out of these standards groups. 10 years and they can't write a specification. The entire world changes in 10 years. Doug On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:37 AM, Guy Morton <g...@alchemy.com.au> wrote: > > On 27/01/2009, at 6:10 PM, Sam Lai wrote: > >> I think the issue here is that if Adobe/MS used SVG as a base instead >> of their proprietary XML dialects, then they won't be able to innovate >> and implement new features as quickly. >> > I disagree, and cite the HTML web browser example again.... > >> If they added proprietary extensions to SVG, there'll be a massive >> backlash as seen with IE and its CSS, JS and HTML extensions. >> > IE is criticized because it is rubbish and *doesn't follow the > standards*. > >> If they try to get it into the standard, it will take ages to get it >> through the committee, and they will lose the competitive advantage of >> developing that feature in the first place. >> >> Unfortunately the standards process just does not keep up with >> innovation. But personally, I don't think it should - details should >> be thrashed out, and issues should be resolved in standards, >> particularly those that could not be foreseen during the initial >> implementation. >> > Yes, that tends to happen and is fine...the point is though that there > is a working towards a standard, which is not currently what's > happening with Flash or Silverlight. Both are pretending SVG doesn't > exist. Flash has some token support for it is the best anyone can say. > >> I'm a believer of what Sebastian said - "Competition is what drives >> technology forward, standards come after the war to clean up the mess, >> but they don't innovate." >> > Again, i disagree, but then maybe I think more highly of humanity than > you do... :-) > >> What would be nice would be a SVG container for Flex/SL, and one that >> can reach out into the app and allow the app to reach in. >> > > Indeed. I'd be amazed if both MS and Adobe don't have a functioning > SVG interpreter figured out for their respective plugins, ready to > jump if that ever becomes necessary (ie, their market share would > improve if they included it). > > Guy > >> >> >> 2009/1/27 Guy Morton <g...@alchemy.com.au>: >> > Both Adobe and MS could have used SVG as the basis for Flex and >> Silverlight, >> > but both prefer to lock people into proprietary approaches. Just >> because SVG >> > doesn't do everything Flash/Flex can do is no reason to use all >> the things >> > it DOES do (it has styling and scripting support for a start...). >> > Having used both SVG and Flex, I can tell you the fundamentals are >> the same. >> > Sure Flex has a much better component library and the flash player >> has >> > better penetration, but most of the things I currently do in Flex >> are doable >> > in SVG. >> > Making the Flex SDK open source is a strategic decision to capture >> more >> > market share. It has nothing to do with supporting W3C standards. >> It is only >> > about funneling more developers into delivering for the Flash >> platform in >> > the face of MS and Silverlight. >> > I think you are seriously misguided about the role of standards. >> HTML seems >> > to have worked pretty well. I don't see MS or Adobe trying to do >> their own >> > versions of that (though they may screw up their support for it at >> times, >> > yes IE is dreadful)... >> > Guy >> > >> > >> > On 27/01/2009, at 9:30 AM, Sebastien ARBOGAST wrote: >> > >> > Like all W3C standards, SVG is just one tiny little piece of the >> puzzle. The >> > Flash platform or silverlight offer much more than that of course. >> Component >> > libraries, styling, scripting support, system integration, >> remoting support, >> > IDEs, and all the accessories that, like it or not, only a big >> company can >> > produce. >> > >> > Competition is what drives technology forward, standards come >> after the war >> > to clean up the mess, but they don't innovate. >> > With the iPhone being so closed, at least Android and Palm have a >> big card >> > to play on openness to compete. >> > But wishing for one silver bullet technology is not a dream, it is >> not even >> > a utopia, it's like wishing for hell on earth. >> > Oh, and by the way, the Flex SDK is totally Open Source, but this >> has >> > already been repeated thousands of times so I guess you know. >> > Sébastien Arbogast >> > >> > http://sebastien-arbogast.com >> > >> > >> > 2009/1/26 Guy Morton <g...@alchemy.com.au> >> >> >> >> Mm..yes, but then again Apple is supporting SVG on the >> iPhone...Adobe >> >> hasn't exactly covered itself in glory with its support for SVG. >> Of course >> >> since they bought Macromedia they no longer have any strategic >> use for it. >> >> And now we have Silverlight from MS we have THREE technologies >> that are >> >> essentially the same - two proprietory and one a W3C standard. >> >> >> >> Sigh. It's the usual mess we get when corporations exercise their >> >> competitive impulses. >> >> Wouldn't it have been nice to have an open vector animation >> standard (SVG) >> >> that would play in a commonly deployed runtime (Flash)? Then we >> could all >> >> develop once and have native playback in browsers that support >> SVG, player >> >> support for those that don't and we'd be able to target the iPhone. >> >> That of course will never happen. :-) >> >> Guy >> >> >> >> >> >> On 27/01/2009, at 12:23 AM, Wally Kolcz wrote: >> >> >> >> Could not have put it any better myself. >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: "Paul Andrews" <p...@ipauland.com> >> >> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 4:07 AM >> >> To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com >> >> Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flex. AIR and IPhone >> >> >> >> >> >> LOL, yes - the iphone only supports two gestures for flex, flash >> and air >> >> and they involve the use of one or two fingers.. >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From:Sebastien ARBOGAST >> >> To:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <to%3aflexcod...@yahoogroups.com> >> >> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:28 AM >> >> Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Flex. AIR and IPhone >> >> You can start by a prayer, because the Flash runtime is not >> available on >> >> the iPhone in any form, including AIR. >> >> And it will probably never be because of commercial and strategic >> reasons: >> >> the day people can deploy Flex applications to the iPhone, the >> App Store is >> >> as good as dead... sort of. >> >> Sébastien Arbogast >> >> >> >> http://sebastien-arbogast.com >> >> >> >> >> >> 2009/1/26 thelordsince1984 <lore...@katamail.com> >> >>> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> i would create an air application and deploy it into iphone >> >>> environment and allow touchscreen gestures. >> >>> How can i start? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks a lot >> >>> >> >>> Regards >> >>> >> >>> Lorenzo >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------ > > -- > Flexcoders Mailing List > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > Alternative FAQ location: https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=942dbdc8-e469-446f-b4cf-1e62079f6847 > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.comYahoo! Groups Links > > > >
