flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Schmalle <apa...@teotigraphix.com>
Subject Re: Why did Adobe create FXG although we had SVG already? (was: FXG 2.0 donation progress concerns and Adobe design tool support)
Date Fri, 15 Mar 2013 10:55:34 GMT
Some one with a solution... refreshing. Harbs, you have my respect.

Warning; do it your self project ahead, no bottle feeding from Adobe!

BTW, I love 100 character subject lines.

Mike


Quoting Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>:

> There's no reason we need to rely on Adobe for this. It's really not  
> such a big deal to create extensions that export to FXG.
>
> I have a lot of CS Extension experience and it would be an  
> interesting project. Of course, I don't have that much spare time? ;-)
>
> If we really think that FXG support is important, I can definitely  
> help with work a CS Extension for the apps that need it. The  
> scripting support in the different apps range from nearly complete,  
> to pretty sparse, but I imagine we could get pretty good coverage in  
> most of them. Which apps would you say needs the SVG/FXG support? I  
> think we should have a single parsing mechanism and convert to/from  
> SVG and FXG.
>
> Harbs
>
> On Mar 15, 2013, at 12:16 PM, Sebastian Mohr wrote:
>
>> Thanks John,
>>
>> In case these "key differences" between FXG and SVG still exist, I don't
>> understand why Adobe folks consider not to support FXG 2.0 and forthcoming
>> versions of FXG in their design tools - like Photoshop CS6 (and later),
>> Illustrator CS6 (and later) and Fireworks CS6 (and later) ???
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sebastian (PPMC)
>> Interaction Designer
>>
>> Looking for a Login Example with Apache Flex? Please check out this code:
>> http://code.google.com/p/masuland/wiki/LoginExample
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM, John Cunliffe <mahnmal@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> second hit<
>>> http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2008/09/30/why-adobe-chose-fxg-over-svg/
>>>> on
>>> google for "why fxg over svg":
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Sebastian Mohr <flex.masuland@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @Alex ... you wrote this:
>>>>
>>>>> Don't PhotoShop and Illustrator output SVG as well?  What is it about
>>> FXG
>>>>> that is a must-have especially if you are targeting HTML and not Flash?
>>>>
>>>> I don't know why Adobe created FXG? For now, I just know that I need it
>>> for
>>>> my work as interaction designer when working with Flash Catalyst CS5.5
>>> ...
>>>> Hopefully, Adobe folks on this list could explain that!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sebastian (PPMC)
>>>> Interaction Designer
>>>>
>>>> Looking for a Login Example with Apache Flex? Please check out this code:
>>>> http://code.google.com/p/masuland/wiki/LoginExample
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/14/13 12:33 PM, "Om" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure what Adobe gains by continuing to
>>>>>>> spend resources on FXG support at this time.  If you can show
there
>>>>> would
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> a significant upside, I will try to bring that case to the right
>>>> people
>>>>> in
>>>>>>> Adobe.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure how I can convince Adobe, but here is my reasoning:
 At
>>>> my
>>>>>> current and previous companies, Fireworks is used just because of
its
>>>>>> ability to convert visual designs into FXG.    We dabbled with
>>>> Catalyst,
>>>>>> but we found that the tool was too complicated to use for Designers,
>>>> but
>>>>>> too elementary for Developers.  But, the ability to serialize visual
>>>>> assets
>>>>>> as FXG turned out to be the best way to skin Flex apps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other side, I am very proficient with Photoshop and not too
>>>>> familiar
>>>>>> with Fireworks.  For my simple apps, I choose to create the skins
in
>>>>>> Photoshop and spit it out as FXG and just import it into Flex.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know other folks that used Illustrator for the same purpose.  (BTW,
>>>>>> Illustrator CS6 still supports the "Save As... > FXG > FXG
2.0"
>>> option.
>>>>> I
>>>>>> just tried it out last night.  Not sure what to make of this. )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thats the possibility of three different tools Adobe could make money
>>>> of
>>>>>> off from customers who don't necessarily use these tools without
FXG
>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And frankly, the absence of this utility could potentially hurt my
>>>> chance
>>>>>> of making sure we dont move away from Flex where I work.
>>>>> Don't PhotoShop and Illustrator output SVG as well?  What is it about
>>> FXG
>>>>> that is a must-have especially if you are targeting HTML and not Flash?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alex Harui
>>>>> Flex SDK Team
>>>>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>>>>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>

-- 
Michael Schmalle - Teoti Graphix, LLC
http://www.teotigraphix.com
http://blog.teotigraphix.com


Mime
View raw message