Sign In/My Account | View Cart  

advertisement

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Weblog:   Macromedia reinvents the Web
Subject:   what I'd like is
Date:   2002-03-13 20:42:06
From:   jdowdell
Response to: what I'd like is

"I'd settle for SVG support in Freehand, at this point."


Thanks, that's a start. There's a couple of things that "SVG support" could be understood to mean, in a rough guess of plausible ascending cost:


-- import of SVG illustrations


-- export of SVG illustrations


-- export of SVG animations


-- export of SVG interactivity


-- export as various SVG variants (Tiny, Basic, ASV-specific, Croczilla-specific, etc)


-- conversion to SVG as native file format for the application


-- use of some SVG renderer as native renderer to visualize external SVG documents


-- shift FreeHand's focus from print to SVG


There could definitely be other things intended by "SVG support" too. What we've been wrestling with is which pieces of work would actually matter to paying FreeHand customers. After that can come a costs/benefits analysis.


Keeping in mind that saying "do it all and then some" would be more expensive than any individual engineering change, could you drop a note to the FreeHand team directly, telling them which feature(s) is most desired, and giving them an idea how much it's worth to you? That could help us in figuring if we can make money with such an investment, thanks. Here's the place: http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/


(Note that a change-request won't automatically get implemented, but these *are* useful as one means of judging breadth and width of desire for investment in a particular area.)


--


For the first paragraph, "take XML seriously" describes a perception of someone else's feeling (and a corporation's "feeling" at that!), so it's hard to translate this into an engineering change-request.


It sounds like you're then asking us to stop selling Flash, in order to help SVG along, which I *would* have trouble taking seriously...? ;-)


Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support
Full Threads Oldest First

Showing messages 1 through 9 of 9.

  • vml
    2002-03-20 03:46:59  bry [View]

    how much would you like to bet that if w3 had accepted vml there'd be full support in flash mx?
    • vml
      2002-03-21 11:23:00  jdowdell [View]

      "...if w3 had accepted vml..."

      Well, they sorta did... Vector Markup Language, along with Adobe's Precision Graphics Markup Language, were two of the main submissions to the W3C's SVG Working Group when it was first drawing up the new file format. (Rephrased, the W3C accepted VML as a submission, even though they didn't rubber-stamp it as their final document.)

      --

      "... there'd be full support in flash mx?"

      Any particular type of "support" you'd be seeking here? Some Microsoft apps include a VML renderer, and I'm not sure of its size. Or would you be looking more at the authoring tool, whether for import, export, something else...?

      --

      Theme: The Macromedia Flash Player earned its initial reputation for efficient vector graphics in browsers, but it has come a long, long way since then, too. The new version tries to help with rich web applications which overtax existing HTML/JS abilities.

      Regards,
      John Dowdell
      Macromedia Support
  • Simon St. Laurent photo Freehand... and Macromedia
    2002-03-14 07:39:35  Simon St. Laurent | O'Reilly AuthorO'Reilly Blogger [View]

    Import and Export of static SVG images would be a huge step forward from the complete non-recognition Freehand offers SVG today. The rest would be nice, but I guess Macromedia would have to consider whether or not it feels like competing with Adobe Illustrator on that front.

    Taking XML seriously would, if I owned Macromedia, mean shifting from binary mashes like SWF to open markup like SVG, XHTML, and SMIL. Somehow I don't think Macromedia has the courage to shift from proprietary to open models. Dreamweaver's dipping into HTML is about as far as I've really seen them go.

    If Macromedia really sees itself as a tools vendor, then I don't think the openness of the format used should kill sales. Unfortunately, I suspect Macromedia wants to own more than just software.
    • XML and Open SWF
      2002-03-18 09:15:18  nickmain [View]

      A couple of points:

      MM does take XML very seriously - the Flash player includes an XML parser and object model - and XML is the preferred way of talking to a server.

      SWF is fairly open - I have written a well used open source Java wrapper for it (JavaSWF) which includes SWF to/from XML translation. This has been used on the server-side with XSLT to consume and create Flash movies.

      There are also plenty of other open source SWF packages in various languages.
      Check http://www.openswf.org
    • Freehand... and Macromedia
      2002-03-14 13:11:02  jdowdell [View]

      "Import and Export of static SVG images would be a huge step forward [for FreeHand]" Good, could you drop a note to the FreeHand team, then? Good context would be what type of files you need to i/o (total SVG spec, partial, damaged files, etc), why existing converters like SVGFactory do not suffice for you, and any buying history you have with FreeHand, thanks.
      http://www.macromedia.com/support/email/wishform/

      --

      Now, let's go back to Jeremy's whitepaper:
      http://download.macromedia.com/pub/flash/whitepapers/richclient.pdf

      I really think you should re-read this! At issue is much more than just vector illustrations in a browser... SVG covers only a fraction of what we're trying to enable with MX. Here is the summary of our action items:

      o Provide an efficient, high-performance runtime for executing code, content and communications.

      o Integrate content, communications, and application interfaces into a common environment.

      o Provide powerful and extensible object models for interactivity.

      o Enable rapid application development through components and re-use.

      o Enable the use of web and data services provided by application servers.

      o Embrace connected and disconnected clients.

      o Enable easy deployment on multiple platforms and devices.

      *These* are the problems we're working to solve. Vector graphics for the web was a preliminary problem, but this was solved back in the 90s and is only a small part of the total implementation today.

      I know you care about this stuff, so I'm asking you to go back, read Jeremy's paper again, and consider what we're really attmpting to help with here. Thanks!

      Regards,
      John Dowdell
      Macromedia Support
      • Simon St. Laurent photo and perhaps
        2002-03-14 13:33:39  Simon St. Laurent | O'Reilly AuthorO'Reilly Blogger [View]

        you should reread my original message.

        I'm objecting precisely to Macromedia's efforts to solve all of those problems _with Flash MX_.

        Do you get that I'm not fond of proprietary binary formats yet?

        If all I wanted was SVG, I don't think I'd have titled the piece "Macromedia reinvents the Web". If you'd prefer, I can always go back and retitle it "Macromedia reinvents the Web in its own image for maximum customer lock-in."

        You can call it "help" if you really need to, but I disagree.

        (And yes, I did submit a request for SVG import/export in Freehand this morning. I'll take small victories happily.)
    • Come down from there....
      2002-03-14 10:13:21  ryanjcooper [View]

      I think what the author really wants here is to own the web himself. While the rest of the world recognizes that proprietary software like Dreamweaver and Flash have allowed web development companies to offer better products for less cost, exponentially accelerating the acceptance of the web in the public arena, Simon want's to keep web programming locked in the ivory tower.

      Hopefully, we all understand the benefits of open-source... but we must also consider free market will. If 98% of the web can view flash content, why would MM want to spend precious development dollars to alter the product to appeal to a small audience of people who have actually downloaded the enormous SVG viewer? Open mark-up is a fantastic ideal, but in the real world, complex programmatical tasks take weeks to develop and months to de-bug, and can often be done more effectively and cost-efficiently by a simple function of a proprietary software like Flash. By sticking strictly to SMIL, XML, and open standards, MM would limit their potential and alienate their core users- common developers, graphic artists, and small business owners like myself, not cave-dwelling anti-corporate linux hacks who can only think about the good ol' day's when they were alone on the web. If you want to be a part of the future of the web, I've got a stock tip for you: MACR
      • Come down from there....
        2002-03-14 12:28:34  jeb1 [View]

        You might want to review MM's stock history before rushing into that good night: http://www.wsrn.com/apps/links/?s=macr&client_id=WSRN&f=RESEARCH

        Good luck on your investment portfolio.
      • Simon St. Laurent photo own the web myself?
        2002-03-14 10:40:06  Simon St. Laurent | O'Reilly AuthorO'Reilly Blogger [View]

        That's hysterically funny. I don't quite grasp how you conclude encouraging support for shared standards leads to me wanting to own the Web myself.

        As for the stock tip, no thanks. I don't think you have much of an understanding of markup or its potential.
Showing messages 1 through 9 of 9.