Python - Web Display Technology

[SamFeltus]

I am trying to figure out why so little web development in Python uses
Flash as a display technology. It seems most Python applications
choose HTML/CSS/JS as the display technology, yet Flash is a far more
powerful and elegant display technology. On the other hand, HTML/JS
seems clunky and antiquated. I am a gardener, and not a coder by
trade, but Flash seems to integrate just fine with Python. Anyways,
what are the technical reasons for this?

http://SamFeltus.com

 

[Heiko Wundram]

Am Donnerstag 18 Mai 2006 08:51 schrieb SamFeltus:

I am trying to figure out why so little web development in Python uses
Flash as a display technology. It seems most Python applications
choose HTML/CSS/JS as the display technology, yet Flash is a far more
powerful and elegant display technology. On the other hand, HTML/JS
seems clunky and antiquated. I am a gardener, and not a coder by
trade, but Flash seems to integrate just fine with Python. Anyways,
what are the technical reasons for this?

There no Python specific reason, but I refrain from using Flash because it
requires more than just the usual browser (which is available everywhere).
Using HTML/CSS/JS, I can make it so that the information I want to give to
the user displays right on pretty much every computer that's available out
there (think PS3), when I resort to techniques such as Flash or Java, I limit
the number of people I can reach.

Take me for example: I'm running Linux on AMD64, and there's no proper Flash
implementation yet which I can plug into my Firefox. So, I'm out on any Flash
page. If you want to exclude me from viewing the information you want to
present, fine, use Flash. If you don't, don't use it.

And: the web is a platform to offer _information_. Not to offer shiny
graphics/sound, which is the only benefit Flash has to offer.

To sum it up: Flash/Java considered evil here.

But that's just my 5 cents.

--- Heiko.

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

SamFeltus enlightened us with:

I am trying to figure out why so little web development in Python
uses Flash as a display technology.

There are a couple of reasons:

- Flash is bad for websites that are 100% done inside the Flash
movie. In such a case the back-button doesn't work anymore,
which is a major usability issue.

- In the above case, bookmarking a page doesn't work either.

- You need an extra plugin. Even though it's available for the
major OSses and hardware systems, it's not available for every
platform that can run a browser.

- The plugin is closed-source.

- The format that is the "source" for the SWF files is a closed,
proprietary format.

- Many user-interface widgets are generally badly implemented in
Flash. For instance, on many scrolling thingies, the scrollwheel
doesn't work. Or, the regular scrollwheel works, but for
scrolling horizontally the tilt wheel isn't supported. Another
example: sometimes it's only clear what a link points to when
you hover over it (revealing a text behind an image, for
instance), which is impossible on some devices (think handhelds
with a touch-screen).

- Search engines don't understand Flash movies. They are also
unable to link directly to relevant pages.

- Many more reasons...

It seems most Python applications choose HTML/CSS/JS as the display
technology, yet Flash is a far more powerful and elegant display
technology.

Flash is indeed more powerful, but not elegant at all.

On the other hand, HTML/JS seems clunky and antiquated.

It's getting a lot better. Try using XHTML 1.1 and only up to date,
platform/browser-independent JavaScript, it'll be much better.

I am a gardener, and not a coder by trade, but Flash seems to
integrate just fine with Python.

It's absolute crap when it comes to coding. ActionScript stands almost
perpendicular to Python when it comes to the Python way of thinking.
In ActionScript there are many ways of doing the same thing, none of
which are obvious. Another thing is that when you call a function that
doesn't exist, that call is silently ignored. The same holds for
getting the value of a non-existing variable. This makes debugging
very difficult.

http://SamFeltus.com

Your site looks quite "unstyled" without flash... And I don't have
Flash player 8...

Sybren

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

Heiko Wundram enlightened us with:

And: the web is a platform to offer _information_. Not to offer
shiny graphics/sound [...]

Many would disagree...

Not me, but I know a lot of people that would.

Sybren

 

[bruno at modulix]

I am trying to figure out why so little web development in Python uses
Flash as a display technology. It seems most Python applications
choose HTML/CSS/JS as the display technology, yet Flash is a far more
powerful and elegant display technology. On the other hand, HTML/JS
seems clunky and antiquated. I am a gardener, and not a coder by
trade, but Flash seems to integrate just fine with Python. Anyways,
what are the technical reasons for this?

- Flash is a proprietary technology requiring a proprietary plugin.
- There aint actually no working Flash plugin for Mozilla on a 64bit
processor - I just *can't* read Flash anims on my computer
- Flash is meant to display animations, not web content
- Flash content is not indexed by search engines
- Flash content cannot be manipulated by normal text/HTML/XML tools

(x)html/css/js is neither 'clunky' nor 'antiquated' (and FWIW, Flash is
based on ActionScript, which is mostly javascript...).

 

[Ben Finney]

It seems most Python applications choose HTML/CSS/JS as the display
technology,

These are open, freely-implementable, non-proprietary standards
controlled by standards bodies.

yet Flash is a far more powerful and elegant display technology.

This is a proprietary, closed format controlled by a single
corporation.

 

[SamFeltus]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable. Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

WC3 at Work - Beware Falling Luddites

 

[SamFeltus]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable. Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

WC3 at Work - Beware Falling Luddites

 

[bruno at modulix]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable.

1. artistic != animated.
2. the web has mostly been designed for text-based content.

Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

Ever heard of SVG ?

FWIW, your site is maybe very artistic, but it's content doesn't show up
much in google :
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:samfeltus.com

Compare with:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site:python.org

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

SamFeltus enlightened us with:

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic
possabilities, all that HTML stuff is acceptable.

You don't need Flash to be artistic.

Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even get off their rear ends and
bring some decent cross platform graphics capabilities to the web
one decade?

Perhaps you can get Mickeysoft to get SVG support in their browser.

WC3 at Work - Beware Falling Luddites

MSIE doesn't even properly support PNG files (at least last time I
looked), so you should start blaming the people that actually don't
implement all the goodies that are already there.

Sybren

 

[John Salerno]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable.

Personally, I always heave a big sigh of resignation when I'm on a site
that uses Flash, because I just feel so locked in to that technology
when it's running. It makes me feel very out of control when navigating
the site.

 

[Paul Rubin]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable. Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

If I want to watch movies, I'll go out and buy a TV set. For web
sites, stick with HTML. I don't have (and refuse to install) the
Flash plugin in my browser and it's a pain in the neck that many
business sites are impossible to even navigate, because there's no way
past the Flash entry screen. The sensible ones have a "skip intro"
link, but a lot of them don't.

 

[Paul Boddie]

I guess there isn't much to understand. If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable. Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

Well, various browsers do support SVG to differing extents, and some of
the best graphical systems of the 1990s were highly oriented around
vector graphics. Not that SVG is necessarily ready or suitable for
every kind of application, but it's probably the best hope for a
display technology that fits in with the general Web conceptual model,
unlike the messing around having canvas elements just so one can
program applet-like stuff in JavaScript, ultimately leading up to the
day when someone writes a Web browser to run in a canvas element.

But as for Flash: even if one suppresses the legitimate sentiment that
Flash is a "dirty", proprietary technology originating from a mindset
that can best be described as "we don't get this Web thing - let's just
dump some multimedia gadget into a Web page", there's almost nothing as
annoying on the Web as going to a site laden with Flash adverts, having
the browser stop in its tracks (like Michael Schumacher turning the
corner to find the track drenched in treacle), in order to fire up the
dancing, audio-infused animations of meaninglessness, sometimes
bringing the browser itself down with a misfiring interaction through
an interface designed for Netscape Communicator.

I haven't set up Flash on my computer - not even the open source,
reverse-engineered implementations of the technology - despite the
increased obsession with various services that want you to run Flash to
show movie clips instead of just providing standard video format files,
for example. If I visit a site that just has an empty page, because the
"user experience" is just one big Flash applet (usually giving textual
information anyway), then as far as I'm concerned, they might as well
have a big sign saying "we don't get the Web".

WC3 at Work - Beware Falling Luddites

I'm not saying that the W3C have moved swiftly and decisively to roll
out wonderful new technologies on a timely basis - perhaps because the
corporate posturing that forms part of any such standardisation
initiatives (possibly involving the beloved creators of Flash, whoever
owns them now) makes it fairly difficult to do so - but you should at
least read up a bit more before coming out with such nonsense.

Paul

 

[Heiko Wundram]

Am Donnerstag 18 Mai 2006 16:09 schrieb SamFeltus:

I guess there isn't much to understand.

Sure, there's a lot to understand here. What I guess you can't come to terms
with is the fact that the web (hell, the whole Internet) isn't designed for
Windows personal computers only, but for a whole range of computer systems
which need to interoperate. For that, you need standards. And: Flash isn't
one, and will never become one. Simply, because it's full of bad design
decisions, and because the company that has the "power" over Flash doesn't
want to make it an open standard. At least I don't see that happen any time
soon.

If you are satisfied with a
text based, static image web, that is light on artistic possabilities,
all that HTML stuff is acceptable.

Are you actually familiar with what you can do with JavaScript and HTML/CSS?
CSS is pretty powerful. Hell, it's very powerful, even. And: why do I need
animated graphics to convey _information_ to a user? I don't surf the web to
have the feeling of walking through an art gallery, but rather surf the web
to gather information I need for my daily life. And: HTML is designed for
that explicitly. CSS too (as in proper presentation of the content you're
trying to convey to the user). And even JavaScript is designed to deal with
_content_, not with pretty but meaningless graphical imagery.

I'm not saying that graphics can't convey meaning. But: the tools to deal with
images are sufficiently advanced in HTML and CSS that I can display any kind
of graphic imagery I need to convey the information to the user.

Perhaps the HTML/JS group will even
get off their rear ends and bring some decent cross platform graphics
capabilities to the web one decade? Perhaps even bring some 90's style
graphics to the browser one decade?

Same as before: do you actually know what the HTML group (well, the W3C) is
doing? They are a very active group, have designed an open format for vector
graphics (SVG, which has been referenced here before), and actually have the
guts to stand up to MickeySoft and their lackeys to keep the format open, and
to keep development of further extensions open.

This is technological advancement at work. Not some company like Macromedia
trying to design a proprietary, insufficiently engineered format, that's just
there so that people who think they need to burry the information they are
trying to convey to the user in graphic imagery so that noone will notice
that there's no actual content in what they are trying to tell you.

--- Heiko.

 

[Florian Diesch]

- Flash is a proprietary technology requiring a proprietary plugin.

There seem to be at least two free implementations:

Package: libswfdec0.3
Description: SWF (Macromedia Flash) decoder library
A decoder library for Macromedia Flash animations, which are often
found on web sites. This is the run-time portion of the library.

Package: libflash0c2
Description: GPL Flash (SWF) Library - shared library
The GPL Flash library is a set of functions that can be used by
applications to play Flash movies. The core of the library is a
portable graphic renderer that can be used to add SWF support to an
application.
.
This package contains shared libraries needed to run programs
that have been build against the library.

- There aint actually no working Flash plugin for Mozilla on a 64bit
processor - I just *can't* read Flash anims on my computer

There are plugins based on the above libs. Maybe they work on 64 bit
platforms.

- Flash is meant to display animations, not web content
- Flash content is not indexed by search engines
- Flash content cannot be manipulated by normal text/HTML/XML tools

- In Flash you can't set bookmarks
- In Flash you can't use your browser's navigation functions
- You can't print animations

(x)html/css/js is neither 'clunky' nor 'antiquated'

<http://www.csszengarden.com/> is a nice example what you can do with
pure HTML and CSS


Florian

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

Florian Diesch enlightened us with:

There seem to be at least two free implementations:

But the website of OP together with the websites of many other people
are incompatible with those, since they require the latest and
greatest Macromedia Flash plugin; that's version 8, while the latest
version for Linux is version 7. I doubt that the Free implementations
are up to par with a version that hasn't even been released by
Macromedia.

Sybren

 

[foxtree]

None of you seem to know what you are talking about.

Flash should be used where one needs to use Flash, and HTML/JS/CSS
(+XML+XSLT) likewise.

Flash can play video. That is not possible w/ HTML/CSS/JS.

Flash also behaves consistently cross-browser, cross/platform -- and
most features cannot be disabled by the user. (compare that to a user
being able to turn off JS, or Java -- something often mandated in a
corporate environment.) It's either "all on" or "all off."

Flash has such a large install base, that it could be argued it is the
most widely available platform for delivering media-rich "applications"
over the web. (And code does not involve anywhere near the same level
of attention to kludges and workarounds that one would have to use to
replicate similar feature -- where possible -- in different browsers
and browser *versions.*) -- Not to sound like I work for
MM/Adobe, but, here's what the Flash Player can do at *run time*:

Flash can load and play external MP3 audio.

Flash can render text -- w/ custom-defined and packaged fonts. (not
possible in a browser!) It can apply a limited set of CSS to the
rendered text, BTW.

Flash can load/parse/serialize/send XML.

Flash can POST and GET a variety of data (true, it may access browser
controls to manage this.)

Flash can access you webcam, allowing you to create your own video
chat/IM app.

Flash can programatically-build vector shapes, gradients, and fills.

Flash can load and render jpegs, gifs(v8), and pngs(v8) -- and in
version 8, composite all that w/ vector graphics (+video?) -- *and,*
sample the resulting display pixel by pixel. (passing that data back
to a server would allow dynamic creation of a jpeg or gif.)

Flash 8 has a new "file upload" ability that goes beyond what a browser
is capable of: You can *multi-select* files, filter files by type or
size, and have programatic access to the state of the upload. It
accesses an Operating System GUI control to do this -- and I have
tested that these features work in MSIE, Moz FF, and Safari on OSX. ***

Flash can #animate# stuff!!!

Flash is like a 2 MB download that works in almost *every* browser out
there. ...it's pretty phenomenal that all those features could have
been crammed into it. (like: a built-in interpreter for a
late-version-EcmaScript-compliant scripting language -- that, in many
ways, is far more capable than what is available w/ JavaScript in most
browsers!)



*** This feature can be used for a web-based CMS! It would blow-away
anything (non-Java) now available for managing and uploading assets.
- Show quoted text -

 

[Ben Finney]

Flash is like a 2 MB download that works in almost *every* browser
out there.

Except all the browsers on platforms Macromedia have not chosen to
support. And no-one else can implement it on those platforms, except
by guessing about the closed implementation specification that
Macromedia have an interest in keeping a secret.

Whereas HTML, CSS and any other technologies standardised by standards
bodies have open specifications and multiple independent compatible
implementations, and anyone who finds their platform under-supported
can follow the open specifications and get a full working
implementation.

 

[SamFeltus]

I am in agreement that open standards are better. I also wish the open
standards bodies would work more creatively, to bring us the most
advanced standards, and not some echo of yesterdays technology. But,
too me, saying No Flash is saying No Source if not Open Source. But,
for me, it is better Closed Source over No Source.

Here is a visual argument, I would love to see a list of AJAX and SVG
sites that display excellent graphics.
http://bacardimojito.com/main.swf
http://tokyoplastic.com/LF.swf
http://coolbreathpower.com/
http://www.peterjoel.com/flash8previews/candleFlame.html
http://shiroganeya.co.jp/main_en.html
http://samfeltus.com/swf/contact_globes.swf
http://justforthefofit.com/
http://mochiland.com/
http://obleek.com/iraq/index.html
http://www.flashbum.com/v4/
http://spaceinvaders.de/ (example of antiquated graphics simply handled
by Flash)

It is my opinion, certainly not fact, that Python is an extraordinary
language, that tends to be very ordinary when it comes to web display
technology, and that it shouldn't be this way.
http://samfeltus.com/swf/stamplicker.swf

 

[Sybren Stuvel]

(e-mail address removed) enlightened us with:

None of you seem to know what you are talking about.

That's not a way to make friends. I very well know what I'm talking
about. None of the issues I've raised are negated by what you say, so
every single one still stands.

Flash also behaves consistently cross-browser, cross/platform

That's where you are wrong. Flash on Mac/MSIE behaves differently than
other platform/browser combinations.

There are also many browsers and platforms that can't use Flash. Even
though Flash is available for Linux, it isn't available for my Zaurus,
for instance.

-- and most features cannot be disabled by the user. (compare that
to a user being able to turn off JS, or Java -- something often
mandated in a corporate environment.) It's either "all on" or "all
off."

And in many corporate environments, it's off.

Flash has such a large install base, that it could be argued it is
the most widely available platform for delivering media-rich
"applications" over the web.

True, but 99.9% of all Flash usage is more an annoyance than truely
useful and "rich".

(And code does not involve anywhere near the same level of attention
to kludges and workarounds that one would have to use to replicate
similar feature -- where possible -- in different browsers and
browser *versions.*) --

ActionScript is a horrible klidge it itself. Don't try to portrait it
as something else.

Not to sound like I work for MM/Adobe, but, here's what the Flash
Player can do at *run time*:

When should it do that if not at run time? At compile time?

Flash can render text -- w/ custom-defined and packaged fonts. (not
possible in a browser!) It can apply a limited set of CSS to the
rendered text, BTW.

But when using my scrollwheel to scroll the page it is used on, my
browser stops scrolling when the mouse is over such a flash file. Very
annoying!

Flash can load/parse/serialize/send XML.

So can JavaScript.

Flash can POST and GET a variety of data (true, it may access
browser controls to manage this.)

So can HTML.

Flash can access you webcam, allowing you to create your own video
chat/IM app.

So can NetMeeting and many others.

Flash can load and render jpegs, gifs(v8), and pngs(v8) -- and in
version 8, composite all that w/ vector graphics (+video?) -- *and,*
sample the resulting display pixel by pixel. (passing that data
back to a server would allow dynamic creation of a jpeg or gif.)

But version 8 is not even available for Linux.

Flash 8 has a new "file upload" ability that goes beyond what a
browser is capable of: You can *multi-select* files, filter files
by type or size, and have programatic access to the state of the
upload. It accesses an Operating System GUI control to do this --
and I have tested that these features work in MSIE, Moz FF, and
Safari on OSX. ***

But version 8 is not even available for Linux.

Flash can #animate# stuff!!!

So can GIF and MNG.

Flash is like a 2 MB download that works in almost *every* browser
out there.

Not on Linux/x86, nor Liinux/ARM, nor Linux/MIPS, ....

(like: a built-in interpreter for a
late-version-EcmaScript-compliant scripting language -- that, in
many ways, is far more capable than what is available w/ JavaScript
in most browsers!)

But it is horrible to work with. I can know, I've had to develop quite
a few advanced Flash websites for my work. My work even went to the
high folks at Disney. I don't need to brag, but apparently I do need
to show you I *do* know what I'm talking about.

*** This feature can be used for a web-based CMS! It would
blow-away anything (non-Java) now available for managing and
uploading assets.

LOL I can write an application that runs circles around Flash. And it
would have the advantage it isn't web-based either - yes, I see that
as an advantage. Web-based is overrated.

I ask of you to take a look at the serious issues many people have
with Flash. It's not just geeks and nerds that are annoyed by
non-functioning scrollwheels, badly designed GUIs, and badly
searchable websites. People that are less familiar with the web are
even more annoyed, but are less capable of expressing that in a
structured and well-defined way, because they simply lack the jargon.

Sybren