Topic awaiting preservation: Is this a good way to work with animations? $Pages that link to <a href="https://ozoneasylum.com/backlink?for=8877" title="Pages that link to Topic awaiting preservation: Is this a good way to work with animations?" rel="nofollow" >Topic awaiting preservation: Is this a good way to work with animations?\$

Author	Thread
amikael Bipolar (III) Inmate From: övik Insane since: Dec 2002	posted 09-29-2003 03:43 Hi, I'm employed, and I'm happy with that, but I'm curious to hear what you guys think about the 'thing' I'm assigned to. It's an animation markup language, Liquid, found here: http://www.naltabyte.se/liquid Basically, it's clientside XML, which behaves as extensions to html, aka, custom tags, and the point is that they take care of a lot of basic stuff for a developer to script 'around', making it easier to create stuff faster. Liquid is meant to be mixed with javascript/Jscript for it to work optimally. Now, I just do what I'm told to do, but I'd like to know what you guys think of the approach itself? (^-^)b
Veneficuz Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: A graveyard of dreams Insane since: Mar 2001	posted 09-29-2003 11:40 The first thing I noticed when I tried to load one of the examples was that it only work on Windows. That is a very bad thing, since web stuff should work on all platforms imo. It was pretty hard to figure out what Liquid acctually was from that page, but the idea doesn't seem all bad. But I think that much of what Liquid is trying to do is allready possible in SVG, so wouldn't it be better to create it as an "extension" of SVG? It would also be easier to make cross-platform in that case since SVG support is increasing in all browsers and there are plug-ins available. Since the whole engine is loaded when you view the page a lot of bandwidth will be used on stuff that isn't really needed in most cases. Because of that it would be 'better' for a developer to create the code himself so he can add just the bit he needs for the page. But this problem could be solved by dividing the script needed into smaller parts... _________________________ "There are 10 kinds of people; those who know binary, those who don't and those who start counting at zero" - the Golden Ratio -
amikael Bipolar (III) Inmate From: övik Insane since: Dec 2002	posted 09-29-2003 18:13 The bandwidth-problem is being dealt with in version 3 coming up next week. Liquid can be embedded in ordinary webpages, mixed with ordinary html-tags, which SVG cannot - not yet at least. It also runs in IE5x without plugins. The use of MIO-files is due to other reasons, since they run the same regardless what browser is used. The irony is that Liquid run in any browser that support DOM-scripting, but the reason it's been limited this way is more a legal thing (I'm employed) than my preferences. I'd be happy running it in Mozilla, but I can't. (^-^)b

Topic awaiting preservation: Is this a good way to work with animations?\$

Author

Thread

amikael
Bipolar (III) Inmate

From: övik
Insane since: Dec 2002

posted 09-29-2003 03:43

Hi, I'm employed, and I'm happy with that, but I'm curious to hear what you guys think about the 'thing' I'm assigned to.
It's an animation markup language, Liquid, found here: http://www.naltabyte.se/liquid

Basically, it's clientside XML, which behaves as extensions to html, aka, custom tags, and the point is that they take care of a lot of basic stuff for a developer to script 'around', making it easier to create stuff faster.
Liquid is meant to be mixed with javascript/Jscript for it to work optimally.
Now, I just do what I'm told to do, but I'd like to know what you guys think of the approach itself?

(^-^)b

Veneficuz
Paranoid (IV) Inmate

From: A graveyard of dreams
Insane since: Mar 2001

posted 09-29-2003 11:40

The first thing I noticed when I tried to load one of the examples was that it only work on Windows. That is a very bad thing, since web stuff should work on all platforms imo.

It was pretty hard to figure out what Liquid acctually was from that page, but the idea doesn't seem all bad. But I think that much of what Liquid is trying to do is allready possible in SVG, so wouldn't it be better to create it as an "extension" of SVG? It would also be easier to make cross-platform in that case since SVG support is increasing in all browsers and there are plug-ins available.

Since the whole engine is loaded when you view the page a lot of bandwidth will be used on stuff that isn't really needed in most cases. Because of that it would be 'better' for a developer to create the code himself so he can add just the bit he needs for the page. But this problem could be solved by dividing the script needed into smaller parts...

_________________________
"There are 10 kinds of people; those who know binary, those who don't and those who start counting at zero"
- the Golden Ratio -

amikael
Bipolar (III) Inmate

From: övik
Insane since: Dec 2002

posted 09-29-2003 18:13

The bandwidth-problem is being dealt with in version 3 coming up next week.

Liquid can be embedded in ordinary webpages, mixed with ordinary html-tags, which SVG cannot - not yet at least.
It also runs in IE5x without plugins.
The use of MIO-files is due to other reasons, since they run the same regardless what browser is used.
The irony is that Liquid run in any browser that support DOM-scripting, but the reason it's been limited this way is more a legal thing (I'm employed) than my preferences.
I'd be happy running it in Mozilla, but I can't.

(^-^)b