Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > flash swf

Reply
Thread Tools

flash swf

 
 
abby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2005
Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which validates to
w3c standards?
The short version offered by w3schools.com doesn't validate for me:
<object width="550" height="400">
<param name="movie" value="somefilename.swf">
<embed src="somefilename.swf" width="550" height="400">
</embed>
</object>

Thanks,
--
Abby

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
WebMaster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2005

"abby" <> wrote in message
news: ups.com...
> Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which validates to
> w3c standards?


Not really. You can use this, if you like:
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is if it is
really worth all the trouble...

Anyway, have fun
--

Rudy
http://www.rol.be
--
Toon mij een cynicus en ik toon u een teleurgestelde idealist.

> The short version offered by w3schools.com doesn't validate for me:
> <object width="550" height="400">
> <param name="movie" value="somefilename.swf">
> <embed src="somefilename.swf" width="550" height="400">
> </embed>
> </object>
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Abby
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
abby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2005

WebMaster wrote:
> "abby" <> wrote in message
> news: ups.com...
> > Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which

validates to
> > w3c standards?

>
> Not really. You can use this, if you like:
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is

if it is
> really worth all the trouble...
>
> Anyway, have fun


Yeah, reading that article was s-o-o much fun ...but it still doesn't
work ...I probably got lost in the verbal clutter

--
A


> --
>
> Rudy
> http://www.rol.be
> --
> Toon mij een cynicus en ik toon u een teleurgestelde idealist.
>


 
Reply With Quote
 
SpaceGirl
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2005
abby wrote:
> WebMaster wrote:
>
>>"abby" <> wrote in message
>>news: roups.com...
>>
>>>Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which

>
> validates to
>
>>>w3c standards?

>>
>>Not really. You can use this, if you like:
>>http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is

>
> if it is
>
>>really worth all the trouble...
>>
>>Anyway, have fun

>
>
> Yeah, reading that article was s-o-o much fun ...but it still doesn't
> work ...I probably got lost in the verbal clutter
>
> --
> A
>
>
>
>>--
>>
>>Rudy
>>http://www.rol.be
>>--
>>Toon mij een cynicus en ik toon u een teleurgestelde idealist.
>>

>
>


It is a terrible article. Just look at the source of
www.subhuman.net/news/news.asp - it has Flash in it. The mark up
validates as XHTML trans.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Steve Pugh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2005
SpaceGirl <> wrote:
>> WebMaster wrote:
>>>"abby" <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which
>>>> validates to w3c standards?
>>>
>>>Not really. You can use this, if you like:
>>>http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is

>>

>
>It is a terrible article.


In the sense of being rather badly written. Technically it's spot on
though.

>Just look at the source of
>www.subhuman.net/news/news.asp - it has Flash in it. The mark up
>validates as XHTML trans.


subhuman.net:
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
data="../animation/menu.swf" width="298" height="100">
<param name="movie" value="../animation/menu.swf" />
</object>

A List Apart:
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
data="movie.swf" width="400" height="300">
<param name="movie" value="movie.swf" />
</object>

Spot the difference?

The only time the satay part of the ALA articles is needed is when you
have a large Flash movie that you want to be streamed. For small,
non-streaming movies the above code, which the ALA article gives half
way, down works fine.

But in both cases the <object> element is missing any content. That's
forgivable on ALA where they're talking about hypothectical code and
where alternative content at the end of the article but is
unforgivable on a real web site. subhuman.net looks rather silly with
the top half of the right hand column being nothing but a blank space.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Adrienne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2005
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Steve Pugh <> writing
in news::

> SpaceGirl <> wrote:
>>> WebMaster wrote:
>>>>"abby" <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which validates
>>>>>to w3c standards?
>>>>
>>>>Not really. You can use this, if you like:
>>>>http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is
>>>

>>
>>It is a terrible article.

>
> In the sense of being rather badly written. Technically it's spot on
> though.
>
>>Just look at the source of
>>www.subhuman.net/news/news.asp - it has Flash in it. The mark up
>>validates as XHTML trans.

>
> subhuman.net:
><object type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
> data="../animation/menu.swf" width="298" height="100"> <param
> name="movie" value="../animation/menu.swf" /> </object>
>
> A List Apart:
><object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="movie.swf"
> width="400" height="300"> <param name="movie" value="movie.swf" />
></object>
>
> Spot the difference?
>
> The only time the satay part of the ALA articles is needed is when you
> have a large Flash movie that you want to be streamed. For small,
> non-streaming movies the above code, which the ALA article gives half
> way, down works fine.
>
> But in both cases the <object> element is missing any content. That's
> forgivable on ALA where they're talking about hypothectical code and
> where alternative content at the end of the article but is
> unforgivable on a real web site. subhuman.net looks rather silly with
> the top half of the right hand column being nothing but a blank space.
>
> Steve
>


Subhuman works fine for IE and Opera, but FF has the blank area on my
system.

I get around that by putting a static image, eg:
<object ...>
<img>
</object>

Of course that only works if the flash isn't interactive.

--
Adrienne Boswell
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
 
Reply With Quote
 
SpaceGirl
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2005
Adrienne wrote:
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Steve Pugh <> writing
> in news::
>
>
>>SpaceGirl <> wrote:
>>
>>>>WebMaster wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"abby" <> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which validates
>>>>>>to w3c standards?
>>>>>
>>>>>Not really. You can use this, if you like:
>>>>>http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/, but the question is
>>>>
>>>It is a terrible article.

>>
>>In the sense of being rather badly written. Technically it's spot on
>>though.
>>
>>
>>>Just look at the source of
>>>www.subhuman.net/news/news.asp - it has Flash in it. The mark up
>>>validates as XHTML trans.

>>
>>subhuman.net:
>><object type="application/x-shockwave-flash"
>>data="../animation/menu.swf" width="298" height="100"> <param
>>name="movie" value="../animation/menu.swf" /> </object>
>>
>>A List Apart:
>><object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="movie.swf"
>>width="400" height="300"> <param name="movie" value="movie.swf" />
>></object>
>>
>>Spot the difference?
>>
>>The only time the satay part of the ALA articles is needed is when you
>>have a large Flash movie that you want to be streamed. For small,
>>non-streaming movies the above code, which the ALA article gives half
>>way, down works fine.
>>
>>But in both cases the <object> element is missing any content. That's
>>forgivable on ALA where they're talking about hypothectical code and
>>where alternative content at the end of the article but is
>>unforgivable on a real web site. subhuman.net looks rather silly with
>>the top half of the right hand column being nothing but a blank space.
>>
>> Steve
>>

>
>
> Subhuman works fine for IE and Opera, but FF has the blank area on my
> system.
>
> I get around that by putting a static image, eg:
> <object ...>
> <img>
> </object>
>
> Of course that only works if the flash isn't interactive.
>


Yep. Which is why the site is a preview site. The "full fat" version
goes live later this month.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-03-2005
abby wrote:
> Is there a code markup to have a flash swf on a page which validates

to
> w3c standards?


Using embed works EVERYHWERE.

Complying to w3c, in reguards to flash doesn't. (Even the allspice work
around has limitations, and fails.)

Which is more important? That you are compliant, or that it works?

You decide.


--
-=tn=-

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flash Movie (.swf) does not work on localhost =?Utf-8?B?TWlrZQ==?= ASP .Net 3 12-18-2005 08:14 PM
IF flash installed THEN file.swf ELSE file.jpg diablo HTML 20 06-25-2005 01:31 AM
Flash .swf in my webform doesn't stop playing... Trint Smith ASP .Net 0 02-27-2004 06:18 AM
ASP.NET & *.swf(Flash files) DzemoT. ASP .Net 2 01-13-2004 07:07 AM
files di flash . swf HTML 0 10-17-2003 07:43 PM



Advertisments
 



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57