[CREATE] OpenRaster vs. FXG? :)

[Hubert Figuiere]

[Putting back the list in CC as you mistakenly left it out. ]


On 05/13/2009 01:56 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
> That is correct.  Just as we did with PDF, we are focused on documenting the
> file format (aka SWF) and not the behavior of "conforming readers" (to use
> the ISO PDF terminology).  The main reason is that, as I said earlier about
> open vs. published, we don't believe that Flash is mature enough to document
> &  codify its behavior as "canonical" and thus lock us into that for the
> future.


But Adobe arleady have codified the behaviour as canonical when they 
released a player. Remember that SWF codifies a computer program, which 
means that the behaviour of the is an important part of the 
specification. Even more when said "player" is closed and under a 
license that restrict its use preventing from using at as a reference to 
codify that behaviour (as it is reverse engineering) [1]

Once you have defined the behaviour that way, that is the intended 
result. Therefor to be compatible, a third party implementor has to do 
the same. Therefor it is part of the file format. Mature is not is not a 
valid excuse. If it was not mature, there wouldn't be a practical 
implementation.


Hub


[1] despite being unenforceable in most jurisdiction the intent is 
there. IANAL.