[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question
From: |
Udo Giacomozzi |
Subject: |
Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:56:09 +0100 |
Hello strk,
Wednesday, November 29, 2006, 3:46:43 PM, you wrote:
s> One of our goal should be providing
s> a *free* and *high quality* specification for Flash applications.
Agree, although this in my opinion still means that Adobe dictates the
specification.
s> That should be aimed at becoming the de-facto standard for players.
s> Of course, extensions would be no problem if supported by the
s> specification, and Adobe will have to deal with it, and we'll be
s> waiting for them at the discussion table :)
Sounds lovely, but I really doubt we will ever have any influence on
the specification, i.e. Adobe won't care about it and design the .SWF
format as it likes. Or, has ever any .PSD viewer had influence over
Photoshop, any OS .PDF reader over the format?
So, this means that Gnash will _always_ be one step behind.
I don't see this as a problem, though.
Udo
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, (continued)
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, John Gilmore, 2006/11/27
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Udo Giacomozzi, 2006/11/27
- Re: Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Martin Guy, 2006/11/27
- Re[4]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Udo Giacomozzi, 2006/11/29
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, strk, 2006/11/29
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question,
Udo Giacomozzi <=
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Rob Savoye, 2006/11/29
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Udo Giacomozzi, 2006/11/29
- Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Rob Savoye, 2006/11/27
- Re[2]: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Udo Giacomozzi, 2006/11/27
Re: [Gnash-dev] Gnash extensions question, Rob Savoye, 2006/11/27