[Foundation-l] Freedom, standards, and file formats

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Brion Vibber wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>   
>> There are so many distinct classes of problem with flash that it can
>> be hard to have a productive discussion about it. 
>>     
> [snip]
>   
>> For the purpose of this discussion I'm going to talk about
>> flash-as-a-video-format. For that purpose the important problems are
>> almost entirely caused by the codecs used inside flash.
>>     
> [snip]
>
> Just a quick note -- there actually *are* potential productive uses of
> Flash outside of the video player context. Like so many things, Flash is
> best used when it's invisible. :)
>
> The primary other areas where I might consider Flash are:
>
>
> 1) An aid in an improved file upload system.
>
> Flash's file upload capability is slightly more flexible than the
> general HTML+HTTP one natively supported by browsers, providing better
> support for multiple file uploads and progress feedback.
>
> WordPress, like MediaWiki an open-source LAMP application, has a nice
> example of a progressive enhancement in their upload widget, using the
> Flash upload interface when available.
>
>
> 2) Fallback implementation of open web standards for Internet Explorer.
>
> Other popular web browsers (the so-called "web standards" world) are
> actively supporting open client-side goodies such as SVG graphics and
> the <canvas> element, which can be used to create <buzzword>rich
> interactive experiences</buzzword>.
>
> Maps, timelines, equation graphs, gravity simulators, all sorts of fun
> and educational things can be created which would benefit from just a
> _leetle_ fancier systems than raw HTML 4 + JavaScript.
>
> That's something we don't currently do, but is something we'll want to
> consider for the future; we're about creating free, open, *educational
> resources*, and visual interactive activities can be part of that goal.
>
> [Of course we don't want to neglect print and non-visual and
> non-interactive models as well! But remember, accessibility doesn't mean
> limiting yourself to the lowest common denominator.]
>
> There are open-source Flash implementations of <canvas> which can
> provide a unified interface that works on modern web-standards browsers
> and on IE with Flash.
>
> Alternatively, a Java version is probably possible too. :)
>
> How best to implement creating interactive thingies in a
> community-edited browser environment (safely!) is an open problem, but
> it's one that might well benefit from properly-considered use of Flash
> (and without any video/audio codec patent issues).
>
> Other tools, such as page activity history graphs which could be zoomed
> inline, could also benefit from this sort of system without having to
> worry about sandboxing. Like so many things, these would benefit from
> progressive enhancement: always support a solid PNG, use dynamic
> <canvas> graphic if available, etc.
>
>
> This stuff wouldn't depend on patented codecs.
>
> - -- brion
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkjluZAACgkQwRnhpk1wk45mqwCgoYtHp1+rUSyMuV1pohgv/SCY
> ur4AoIb4FArXvGUsYbhfS9Lnon4gTCZu
> =jRU9
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________

In complete contra-distinction to Eriks post, this
on the face of it appears to be a useful contribution
to the discussion about file formats.

For both my own benefit and the benefit of others
who may be equally at sea with regard to the fine
points of this subject, let me attempt to paraphrase
what you have said above in a way that makes more
simple sense to me. I hope you will correct any errors
of understanding I have, because that is why I am
doing the following:

If I understand correctly, you are saying that flash
can benefit us not as something in which our
content in the sense of the "original" document
is kept, but as a form of conveying that "original"
document to a prospective single time user. That is
not conveyed to somebody who wants our content
for mass reuse, but who wants just that one snippet
of content, that one time.

Or even conveying our massive lumps of content for
reuse, but only during transit, not changing the
format in which it is stored at our end, nor at their
final product stage.

The second part of your message, do I understand
it correctly that you are suggesting that content
we would already have in some form, could be
conveyed to people who can not digest it in the
format in which it is stored, by some <magic>
fashion can be made available to them, by the
expedience of using flash, when nothing else
would serve?


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen