Posted by SpaceGirl on 10/05/07 14:44

On Oct 5, 2:49 pm, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4...@centralva.net> wrote:

> > Very few web sites are just text. Even ones designed for mobile
> > platforms. Text-only sites are NOT good enough for most people. Fine
> > for machines (screen readers) and other inhuman devices, but for
> > emotional creatures like this, reams of unformatted text are... nasty,
> > uninteresting.
>
> I did not say devoid of style. I am say that in no way a "image" of text
> will be smaller then text including the CSS styling.

No different than flash. Okay, so for a web page to render you send
strings of text that contains formatting tags. Flash sends strings of
binary. Same thing, even smaller. Flash doesn't store things as
bitmaps inside itself (unless, they are bitmaps!), they're stored as
instructions to redraw the artwork. Flash is vector based.

> > Because very few people use Flash for this yet. The technology is very
> > new. It wasn't really achievable (realistically) before Flash 9. Flash
> > contains a full-blown language; you can completely construct a UI
> > inside it without ANY external graphics, meaning the size is tiny. You
> > can create a fully working blog in around 5Kb, including graphical
> > header, a fluid animated UI. It'd work on all computers that have
> > Flash 9 player installed. Think of all the HTTP & IP overhead (1kb or
> > more, per file) you are saving alone by serving a single SWF file vs.
> > lots of small gifs, the page itself, css document and so on.
>
> 5Kb eh? URL?

Just install Flash, read about AS3.

[Back to original message]