Posted by
Jacques Le Roux on
Sep 04, 2005; 2:43pm
URL: http://ofbiz.116.s1.nabble.com/OFBiz-Users-Re-would-like-to-changethe-contentmanagementcomponent-of-OfBiz-tp135774p135779.html
Olivier,
Thanks for all these informations. Il will put them also on an OFBiz Wiki
page soon...
> > . And finally, Flash is really not a W3c standard (as opposed to CSS
and
> > XHTML - of course XML - and even *ECMAScript* and DOM)
>
> Not, it's not yet. Let's see what happens after Adobe has aquired
Macromedia.
> Maybe Flash/SWF becomes a standard like PDF or PS.
I meaned W3C (open) standards, but you are right PDF and PS are also
standarts...
Perhaps as Firefox 1.5 includes natively SVG, this technology must be also
regarded ?
http://www.adobe.com/svg/Jacques
PS :
>
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/javascript/2002/05/24/swf_not_flash.html.
I just read this page, very interesting. Just one thing : Macromedia is not
W3C ;o)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Oliver Lietz" <
[hidden email]>
> Am Sonntag, 4. September 2005 02:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> [...]
> > >The problem with this is. The Lazslo Presentation Server on Windows XP
> > >running on a Intel PIV 2.2Ghz with 256 MB DDR RAM takes around 8-10
mins
> > > to start and around 15 mins to actually deliver the first page. Also
> > > whenever you veisit a page for the first time there is a overhead of
> > > about 3 mins.
>
> The "performance" is indeed bad. 256 MB RAM is surely not enough for a
J2EE
> application like OpenLaszlo and Windows. I have a very good performance
> experience with Flex on PowerPC G4 1,2GHz with 1280 MB RAM (development
> machine, not yet in production).
>
> > Your explanations are very welcome : you are the first on this ML
reporting
> > real use of Lazslo and this reinforces some of my "a priori" against
Lazslo
> > and pro Ajax. Althougth (and specialy for this type of think) 256MB on
XP
> > is certainly a bit short. Quickness is the main but not the only reason
:
> >
> > . As you said "it generates Flash O/P which can be only veiwed
> > with the Flash plugin."
>
> That does not have to be a disadvantage. Flash is more cross-browser than
AJAX
> and AJAX is more cross-platform than Flash. Safari and Konqueror can't
render
> most of the demos of openrico.org. This cross-browser vs. cross-platform
> ratio might change in future because of ongoing efforts to develop an open
> source Flash player. The cross-browser DHTML stuff is fragile and I can't
see
> that it will change in future.
>
> > . And Flash is proprietary so : specifications might change, or even
Flash
> > might disappear (don't laugh, who remembers the Eighties PC DB
"standard"
> > DBase III ? There are so much examples...)
>
> but SWF is not closed, see
http://www.osflash.org and
>
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/javascript/2002/05/24/swf_not_flash.html.
>
> > . Flash is not read by non graphic navigators (for blinds, by example)
and
> > *worst* by crawlers
>
> You can use Flash's accessibility features:
>
http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/accessibility/features/flex/overview.html>
> And you normally don't need crawles accessing your web applications (not
web
> sites), but you can of course add other interfaces like HTML, WML, SOAP or
> XML-RPC to your applications.
>
> > . And finally, Flash is really not a W3c standard (as opposed to CSS
and
> > XHTML - of course XML - and even *ECMAScript* and DOM)
>
> Not, it's not yet. Let's see what happens after Adobe has aquired
Macromedia.
> Maybe Flash/SWF becomes a standard like PDF or PS.
>
> > At this point I try to resume all the links we have got on this subject
:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnintlong/html/longhornch03.asp
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users