Skip to main content
J
josh_on
Inspiring
September 4, 2009
Question

TLF size

  • September 4, 2009
  • 1 reply
  • 2881 views

I am making an app as an Actionscript Only project, the target size should be around 100k.  I added TLF and it grew from 100k to around 250k, with the addition of two selectable containers in a single TextFlow.  I want to use this functionality, but don't want this to consume that much bandwidth. I looked into using the RSL swz version of TLF, but it doesn't seem possible to use that with an Actionscript only project and converting it to a Flex project will only increase the size and dependencies on external libraries.

I am quite frustrated because the promise of fast and comprehensive text manipulation has been one of the greatest appeals of FP10.

I thought perhaps that I was missing something obvious and went to see if I could build some simple functionality on top of FTE but that is seriously low level. I thought that the TextField class could have been upgraded to work using the FTE, and have multiple field selection capabilities...

My questions are:

1) Why isn't TLF included in FP10?

2) Is there anyway to use an RSL version in an Actionscript only project? Is it possible in CS4 Flash IDE?

3) If I use the RSL swz file from Adobe (http://fpdownload.adobe.com/pub/swz/flex/4.0.0.7219/textLayout_427.swz) - are there any performance issues with uptime etc?  I could potentially be sending a lot of traffic there. Will there be a permanent URL?

4) Has anyone built a smaller less featured alternative - something akin to the pre-existing TextField


Hopefully I have been seriously mistaken in my understanding of the current situation.

This topic has been closed for replies.

1 reply

R
Adobe Employee
rdermer
Adobe Employee
September 4, 2009

Not sure I can give you satisfactory or even correct answers to your questions.

First the size is an issue - when we talk to clients they often say less code size please and then pour on the feature requests.   Its, of course, not how many usages you have - the incremental cost for the second container is small.  Reccomendations for how to improve things?  We have a few ideas but not much will happen in the 1.0 time frame.

It is possible to use an RSL swz with ActionScript w/o flex.  You might be able to extract that out of the Flex code.  I have no information on performance and uptime with the swz repository.  I'll try to get some statement of where we are going with swz hosting.

TLF is decoupled from FP10 for schedule and flexibility reasons. TLF is on a much longer timeline than FP10 and allows introduction of features independent of FP10.  The idea was to develop core features for global text in FP10 necessary for line breaking and then wrap an AS3 library on top of it for editing and line placement.

I have no knowledge of any alternate TextField or TLF like things being developed directly on top of FTE but hey could happen.  All efforts I'm aware of are building on top of TLF.  If anyone is doing that and has issues and questions about FTE they are certainly welcome to post them here or in a Flash forum.


Hope that helps,

Richard

J
josh_onAuthor
Inspiring
September 4, 2009

Thanks Richard,

If someone could point me to an example of using an RSL swz with ActionScript w/o flex I'd be really appreciative.  I think for the project that I am doing it may work out to use that, perhaps with a fallback to a locally hosted version.

I would definitely vote for at least some of the core classes of the TLF being included in the player, because even to get get basic Textfield functionality with selecting text etc, there is a lot to done when starting from FTE.

Of course there is still the old TextField class - but it sadly still is very hard to work with foreign characters, inline images and multiple container selections - all features that I was looking foward to making use of in a small swf.

Best,

Josh

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices