Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

REBOL, Flash and Browsers and plugins

 [1/2] from: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 11-Mar-2003 13:27


[SunandaDH--aol--com] wrote:
>Roland: >[was Re: earth demo]
<<quoted lines omitted: 7>>
>application delivery -- that's any form of application, not just annoying >graphics.
exactly. We will either accept excuses and get nowhere, or take facts for granted. What if I tell you that I wold like to see World demo rotating 5 times faster? Well, that is not reply to you, Sunanda, but just an extension to your comment regarding flash ...
>> What really bugs me is that REBOL does not integrate into browsers, >> though.
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
>I seem to remember that there was an IE-only REBOL plug-in at one point. So >it is possible; it just hasn't been carried through all the way.
Well, I think that having rebol drawing inside browser's window would be nice, but otoh it is not imo necessity. It would be maybe sufficient enough to have somehow .r (or other extension) registered, which would tell browser to start Rebol and pass script to it. Following steps would be imo needed: 1) Sorting out Rebol + registry issues. I would like to recommend to discard any signle touch of Rebol products with registry. While I lost my argument agains RT in the past, that it may be usefull to have such registry association at least for typical user, I still think the situation is rather messy and only causing problems. If Rebol does not use one-exe + components strategy, then what product should be .r registered to? View/Command? View? IOS? Core? - what if I want to have it simply associated with my favourite text editor? I think that sorting out this issue would add simplicity to rebol usage. Rebol's --noinstall command-line option should be turned upon --install, and the logic should be reversed ... That is first - freeing .r extension ... 2) other pov could be to agree upon some other rebol extension ... we've seen some of them already - - rip - rebol archive - rxx - new package distribution format? Extension name I don't remember exactly - rap - IOS closed source modules I think that we are a bit leaving simplicity here once again - just tell me, honestly, if you can easily remember how to create one of them, how to unpack them, etc.? Some time ago I suggested to go for zip:// scheme - some apps use it as storage mechanism (e.g. WinAmp for skins) and it is readable by many tools and can be even secured by password (although maybe not securely enough). Many file managers treat such known archives as ordinary directory, so deployment is rather easy. Well, now let me say that it is not fault of RT here. Carl asked for assistance here, but we don't have skilled C coders probably to proceed in that direction (OTOH without knowledge of rebol internals it could be a bit difficult to implement in acceptable way) So - another possible extension - rpl? Rebol player ... I will try to explain ... First let me state that I don't know, what is general procedure to register plug-in with browser. I only remember browser taking me to certain download page, then dialog appeared asking me if I want to trust Macromedia Stuff in future. So - is there any certificate checking, is there any browser interface, thru which you have to regiter your plug-in and its extension? REBOL player could be kind of Encapped app. I installed Java and its WebStart. Hey, they stoled View desktop idea, even in more primitive way! View desktop is half-way there. "GO" button let's us to visit various rebsites. The idea of REBOL Player could be mixture of two aproaches: a) Installation process of Rebol Player - mostly putting rebol-player.exe into some dedicated directory. Apps would be installed into subdirectories (in a similar way View Desktop does it nowadays) and maybe going away from sandbox should be forbidded at all? b) .rpl extension would be "somehow?" registered, so that browser would know about REBOL Player and would pass url to it ... c) rebol player would launch the app or it would add it to interactive list of available apps, marking it as selected, and there would be lauch or "go" or "run" button ... d) Rebol player would have auto-update feature as Cerebrus does. The bad thing is, that with SDK, XORed executable is now bigger, as protocols etc are part of your source, not executable anymore. Maybe it would be better to use View + Encap in that regard e) some data format for packed script - .rpl ... or we may use .rip or? .... Central module (function) to check for newer version and if auto-download-new-version checked, download it ... Of course there are other questions I am not skilled enough to answer - what would be the initial process? User writes http://www.somedomain.com/someapp.rpl and how does browser know he/she needs rebol player, where to find one, etc.? Anyway - just a food for thought ... sorry for being so long, but I am always trying to see things in wider perspective and cover all possible overlapping issues ... maybe we can come app with some proposal and make something usefull of it? Looking forward to further discussion ... Cheers, -pekr-

 [2/2] from: cyphre:seznam:cz at: 11-Mar-2003 18:04


Hi Sunanda, Petr and all, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Petr Krenzelok" <[petr--krenzelok--trz--cz]> To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 1:27 PM Subject: [REBOL] Re: REBOL, Flash and Browsers and plugins
> [SunandaDH--aol--com] wrote: > >Roland:
<<quoted lines omitted: 9>>
> > > >Flash is a much richer language/environment than you'd ever imagine if
you've
> >just seen it being used to generate annoying demos. It's a fully-featured > >programming language that is one of the main contenders for future > >application delivery -- that's any form of application, not just annoying > >graphics. > >
Sunanda, I'm not sure about your statements. IMO The ActionScript is pretty crap . I'm currently working together with Oldes on big FlashMX based project(6 interactive CD-ROMS) and have to say that developing with this technology is really big mental pain when comapring with Rebol/View. Yes, Flash has some better graphics features but View has also lot of things that Flash is missing. Also don't forget that Flash is version 7 while View is still under 1.5. If I had few milions of $$ to invest into the RT to be more multimedia friendly :-) I have to work almost everyday with Macromedia products for a few years and I could say that none of them is worth buyin for such money...and now when M$ is buing Macromedia it will go in hell of even more bloated software products... just a bit of my experience...
> exactly. We will either accept excuses and get nowhere, or take facts > for granted. What if I tell you that I wold like to see World demo > rotating 5 times faster? Well, that is not reply to you, Sunanda, but > just an extension to your comment regarding flash ... >
Petr, I don't think the World demo will be much faster if done in Flash but I(or someone with more free time) could try to rewrite it for comparison... regards, Cyphre

Notes
  • Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
    View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted