sorry for starting a flame war. i just meant, that if flash really dies (what is the purpose of the media), flex also. recreating it in javascript is not an option. i meant we need to show, that there is place for both flash and html5. the two things is completely different. html5 has a canvas tag. so what? flash has a webview component. but if the people hear every day that flash is dead, they won't pay for a flash ria, even if it would be faster, better, cheaper. please don't take it as an offense, i'm not fighting, it was my toughs. I'm young, so i can be wrong :)
peace. On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Raju Bitter <rajubit...@googlemail.com>wrote: > > This project should not, in my opinion, focus on the actual runtime > except for the very specific cases > > were it is absolutely necessary. I say that we deal with issues > regarding runtime and language when > > they appear letting the community decide how to best deal with them. > Don't really agree with you here. Even Adobe started investigating > JavaScript generation out of ActionScript code. If the creator of > Flex, ActionScript and Flash investigate cross-compilation of > ActionScript to JavaScript, why should Apache Flex ignore that > approach? > > I see one of the chances of an Apache Flex versus Adobe Flex that the > community can drive the project into a direction, where an HTML5 based > runtime for Flex will be created. If you'd rather see that as a > separate project next to Flex (e.g. Apache Falcon), that's of course > an option. > > Is there any legally binding agreement between Apache Flex and Adobe > that the company will always provide a runtime environment for Flash > for the next 3-5 years? If not, Adobe can at any time pull the plug on > - let's say - desktop browser Flash Player, and only offer AIR/mobile > App generation out of ActionScript. > > Just my thoughts, I'm aware of the fact that quite a few people will not > agree. > > - Raju >
