flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Om <bigosma...@gmail.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 11:06:39 GMT
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
>
>
I have dabbled with CSIDE.  I can help you out if you start this project.

Thanks,
Om



> 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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message