On 3/7/13 2:45 PM, "Alain Ekambi" <jazzmatad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dont get me wrong i have nothing against the component.
> It looks great and probably deserves the price.
>
> It s the idea that i have to pay some money to display HTML inside a web
> app that does nt sound right to me.
> If something is going to run in the browser one would expect it will be
> able to display HTML
> and operate well with JavaScript.No ?
Well, one of the things that made Flash popular was that it didn't play with
HTML/JS so you could guarantee your rendering in different browsers.
But yeah, that's why I did that prototype years ago. I thought we should
render HTML in Flash so you didn't have this integration issue. Here's the
blog post: http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui/2008/01/html_and_flex_1.html
However, many folks felt that this was the equivalent to writing webkit, or
at least, the design-view in DreamWeaver and we didn't have resources to do
it. That could be true, but I still get the feeling it is easier than that
because I would make some assumptions like only supporting XHTML so I don't
have to have all of that smart parsing logic that handles bad XHTML.
Early versions would be display-only and not run script. To run script you
would need a JS interpreter.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
