On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Tei <oscar.vives(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Anyway this is a discussion for
mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject='[OT] Is Flash
Often people choose binary protocols (like SWF) because it make easier
to optimize the filesize. Anything that make lots of request to a
server may have a horrible overheat.
And you can save a SWF file, and play it offline.
Whether Flash is acceptable for Wikimedia uses is not off-topic. It's
been discussed here and on Foundation-l in the past, and it's been
made clear that it and other non-free formats will be avoided wherever
practical for official uses. Of course, what users may choose to put
up on the toolserver or other places is a different issue.
larger filesize here. In principle all you'd need is a short
procedural script that would replace the HTML of the page and let the
browser re-render it. Unless you plan to squish it so that it fits in
a reasonable-sized image, and is unreadable on large pages?
Of course, actually rendering the real page would have a very good use
beyond being standards-compliant: it would serve as a quick way to
jump through revisions looking for where a change was introduced or
similar, rather than having to go back to the history page and click a
link. You could even do prefetching to avoid synchronous page loads
and thereby make it very fast, like paging through Gmail. It could be