Hi. Thank you for your suggestion. We actually used to have a Flash and ActionScript forum. However, it wasn't very popular and didn't get much activity. Therefore, it was condensed into our Graphics and Multimedia forum. Once we see a significant number of ActionScript-related questions being asked in this forum (enough to stand on its own), it will be brought back out into its own category.
cscgal
The Queen of DaniWeb
19,420 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,474
Solved Threads: 229
hi, it is ok..
but now if u see Flash is the most powerfull tool used for web development..
In my opinion, I must disagree.Potential flame war first shot -- proceed with caution! It is extremely useful, true, but it is over-used and IMAO should NEVER be used to create a website, only to enhance one. If I need information from some Flash site, I have to screen capture the window and reedit to use a graphic or run the dang thing thru an OCR translator to utilize the information. Not to mention having to wait while the page itself loads.
Flash should be used to enhance a site. In place of a picture, you put flash animation, interactive data, basically use the power it contains in conjunction with a webpage, not in place of a webpage. End possible flame -- please don't kill me! it is just my opinion
So I woud request u to Kindly give a seperate Category for flash.. so that it will be easy to Communicate ..
But as Dani already said, few want to communicate at this point. If there is more communicating going on, having a flash forum makes sense. At this point, a forum with 1 poster is a waste. Drum up some more business, get some people in a discussion, and I'm sure with more traffic a dedicated forum will happen.
WaltP
Posting Sage w/ dash of thyme
10,474 posts since May 2006
Reputation Points: 3,342
Solved Threads: 938
> I have to screen capture the window and reedit to use a graphic
It would be against copyright laws to use a graphic off of a webpage. For example, I wouldn't want people to steal the graphics I created for DaniWeb and use them in their own publications or documents.
cscgal
The Queen of DaniWeb
19,420 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,474
Solved Threads: 229
hi,
You are righ from your pont of view,, But i would like you to look at the broader part of it..
If u see then u may realize that the whole videostreaming and video uploading etc is possible just because of Flah only and more over it is not just a web enhancer it is much more that that,,,
So you are saying there would be no video streaming without Flash? Somehow I don't think that's true. I doubt most professional video streaming uses Flash.
Yes I know it's much more than a web enhancer. My point is that IMO it should not be used tocreate websites. There's a heck of a lot it can do, that doesn't mean it's the best tool for all of it. That's like saying because salt is one of the best flavor enhancers, it's all you should use.
And if you look at most of the important sites that do what you say, I can't think of one that's written in Flash, they're all enhanced by Flash.
> I have to screen capture the window and reedit to use a graphic
It would be against copyright laws to use a graphic off of a webpage. For example, I wouldn't want people to steal the graphics I created for DaniWeb and use them in their own publications or documents.
Yes using copyrighted material is not a good thing. I'm talking about research, generally. I find some information I need for a report, I find it's best to download it and deal with it offline (reformatting to print and read later, specifically).
Many times with the variety show I produced, I needed a picture and description of a performer for the advertising. Flash sites were useless when I needed promotion material. I have to bother the performer andhope s/he has time to email what I should be able to simply download.
I'm definitely not talking about sniping graphics and data to reuse on another site.
WaltP
Posting Sage w/ dash of thyme
10,474 posts since May 2006
Reputation Points: 3,342
Solved Threads: 938
I dunno, WaltP. I'm still in disagreement. Photographs on the web might be copyrighted by that photographer for his portfolio. It may not be right to take those images without asking and use them in your own promotional materials. Don't photographers specifically earn a living by taking pictures of actors and then earning royalty fees when their photos are chosen to be used in various promotional materials?
cscgal
The Queen of DaniWeb
19,420 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,474
Solved Threads: 229
I dunno, WaltP. I'm still in disagreement. Photographs on the web might be copyrighted by that photographer for his portfolio. It may not be right to take those images without asking and use them in your own promotional materials. Don't photographers specifically earn a living by taking pictures of actors and then earning royalty fees when their photos are chosen to be used in various promotional materials?
Please understand the scenario I laid out:Many times with the variety show I produced, I needed a picture and description of a performer for the advertising.
Without advertising, the show is a bust. Entertainers actually have those pictures and bios for advertising purposes. And many that don't have special promo materials (and that's most of them) expect you to download information.
Yes, photographers earn their living by photographing performers. But the pic are the performer's property. If I design a graphic for DaniWeb and I hold the copyright, you would have to get my expressed permission for every use. Can you see a performer asking permission to send out 200 pics to the plays and movies he's applying for, not to mention 10,000 autographed pictures to be sent to fans? No, the photographer generally does not hold copyright on the pictures. They are the subject's property, a service bought and paid for.
The copyright is held by the person/entity who purchased the shoot, I believe. That's why the photographer has the person sign a waiver that the picture may be used for the photographer's portfolio, not the other way around. Non-purchased shots are owned by the photag, andthat's where the royalties come in.
WaltP
Posting Sage w/ dash of thyme
10,474 posts since May 2006
Reputation Points: 3,342
Solved Threads: 938
Actually, it gets more scrambled than that. The ownership rules are different for a salaried employee than they are for an independent contractor.
But there is also the fair use doctrine. For research purposes, you can copy it for personal (but not professional) use.
You are also permitted to make a copy if you have to convert the format to a form your machine can display.
I predict that, within a few years, copyright will become totally impossible and will be repealed.
MidiMagic
Nearly a Senior Poster
3,319 posts since Jan 2007
Reputation Points: 730
Solved Threads: 182
Back to the original topic; JavaScript and ActionScript are both ECMAScript with environmental extensions; if you posted a question specifically about ActionScript (not graphics or animation!) into the (new!) JavaScript forum, I imagine people there will be happy to help and discuss... I don't know if that's a bad tactic with regard to organisation though, so don't take my word for it.
Just a suggestion >>
Perhaps Javscript/DHTML/AJAX could be split into ECMAScript (Javascript/Actionscript etc) in programming, and DHTML & AJAX in web development; since DHTML and AJAX require a very specific subset of Javascript, and graphics is indeed, only one aspect of Flash.
<
MattEvans
Veteran Poster
1,386 posts since Jul 2006
Reputation Points: 522
Solved Threads: 64