23, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Daniel Freeman wrote:
> I wrote one of those. I wrote SVG -> AS3 graphics. And extending that
> class, I wrote FXG -> AS3 graphics.
>
> It wasn't a complete implementation of the SVG or FXG standards. It
> didn't handle text, and complex gradien
I wrote one of those. I wrote SVG -> AS3 graphics. And extending that
class, I wrote FXG -> AS3 graphics.
It wasn't a complete implementation of the SVG or FXG standards. It didn't
handle text, and complex gradients weren't perfect. The FXG class was
based on Adobe's first FXG definition. But
Harbs wrote:
> Here's all issues sorted by popularity:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Apopularissues-panel
>
> Number 1 is a Maven/Flexmojos build:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33086
&g
Hi Justin,
Out of interest, what new feature has the most number of votes ?
I'm not enamoured with the idea of donating these apps just for asset
stripping.
If I was writing this flex component - I might borrowing a little from
something already written - but I'd be likely to write it afresh.
O
e Squiggly spell check, and as3corelib.swc
>What is the current license for the code?
I've never released the source to anyone - so no license right now.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2/22/13 8:54 PM, "Daniel Freeman" wrote:
&g
Sorry, yes. I was referring to the new roadmap.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplatform/whitepapers/roadmap.html
I've blogged about the news here:
http://madskool.wordpress.com/2013/01/30/adobes-cut-price-roadmap-and-mc3dnext
@Kevin, I can accomplish miraculous graphics performance when I code
gt; sure many of us would not mind polishing it up, if it's not yet ready for
> publication…
>
> Harbs
>
> On Jan 24, 2013, at 4:23 AM, Daniel Freeman wrote:
>
> > @Om, I think people misunderstand what I've demoed here. The demo was a
> > very quick and dir
t about my intentions.
And people don't like my attitude. It is my intention deliver MC3D"next".
Not Flex"next". My idea is to offer these classes as the basis for
Flex"next" - if you want.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Om wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 a
@Mike, I've updated my wording slightly. But it's getting late (Brisbane
time), and I'll see how things look in the morning.
I don't apologies for carefully qualifying my expected contributions, and
my expectations of other people's contribution. While I've changed the
wording and dressed it up
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Avi Kessner wrote:
> Conceptually, I don't understand why you would want to have more than "just
> a UI framework", if your goal is to make use of the GPU.
>
> The fewer dependencies the better.
>
>
@Avi,
I see memory management, and server communication as impo
"I would expect the Open Flex group to put in the development work for this
? not me."...
Let me clarify what I mean. It is my intention to port MadComponents/MC3D
over to AS"next". This is quite an undertaking. Combined with the effort
that I've already put into the framework, and the new GPU-
I've done some experiments with Stage3D accelerated Flex components,
derived from MadComponents classes.
http://madskool.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/madcomponents3d-part5-stage3d-accelerated-flex/
It is my intention to port MadComponents to AS"next". I propose that these
ported MadComponents/MC3D c
12 matches
Mail list logo
