Actually this blog post I'm referring to is very interesting, since it
shows how Adobe deals with "multi-runtime" API problems: http://www.andersblog.com/archives/2008/09/flash_on_the_be.html
Running into problems integrating <svg> into <mxml> is solved by
defining a new standard (FXG), which is optimized for Flash
(proprietary) and your creative tools (http://www.developmentarc.com/site/2009/07/adobe-fireworks-fxg-export-updated/
). Which means: they don't move away from defending their market
share by inventing/building proprietary plugins.
On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:17 PM, Raju Bitter wrote:
If you check out this video http://code.google.com/p/svgweb/ (Tech
Talk at Google recently on SVG Web and Open Web Advocacy from Brad
Neuberg), you'll see that the svgweb project is in very similar to
OL in the way we can deal with open web and open standards: enable
usage of HTML5/CSS3 - and by that enabling innovation - while still
supporting IE6/IE7.
On Adobe/SVG: Flex4 has FXG, which is a modified version of SVG,
with adoption to better match the Flash 10/11 features: "When
initial work on an XML-based graphics interchange format began, the
natural first thought was to use SVG. However, there are key
differences between SVG and Flash Player’s graphics capabilities.
These include core differences in SVG and Flash’s rendering model
with regards to filters, transforms and text. Additionally, the
interchange format needed to be able to support future Flash Player
features, which would not necessarily map to SVG features. As such,
the decision was made to go with a new interchange format, FXG,
instead of having a non-standard implementation of SVG. FXG does
borrow from SVG whenever possible."
http://www.andersblog.com/archives/2008/09/flash_on_the_be.html
On Sep 28, 2009, at 9:33 PM, P T Withington wrote:
On 2009-09-28, at 04:42, Raju Bitter wrote:
It's interesting to see that the SVG folks have a demo showcase
which shows their application running as either SVG or Flash:
http://codinginparadise.org/projects/svgweb/samples/demo.html
Isn't that just because they have never succeeded in getting any
browsers to support either native or plug-in SVG?
What's weirder to me is that Adobe was a major backer of SVG. Now
they have the "means of production" (they could stealth distribute
an SVG plug-in as part of the next Flash update), but they've never
taken advantage of that.
At one point, Henry demonstrated that we could use an SVG player as
an LZX back-end; but if there are no SVG players, that's not really
of interest.
