2 ms·
In terms of sending a single SWF file to someone: The HTML equivalent would be to inline your CSS and Javascript, and use data URLs to inline images/assets. Now
by 8organicbits 6y ago
In terms of sending a single SWF file to someone: The HTML equivalent would be to inline your CSS and Javascript, and use data URLs to inline images/assets. Now you have a single, self contained HTML file you can send around and it will "play" when you double click it.
I suppose the point may be that no one has written a tool to package a HTML5 app up like that? Seems possible to build under certain constraints.
- stupidcar 6y agoThey have. It’s called Webpack. There are also various similar tools. EDIT: I got downvoted for telling the truth? The website is here if you don't believe me: https://webpack.js.org/ https://webpack.js.org/ It literally does what the post I replied to asked for.
- claytongulick 6y agoI've noticed an increase in upvote/downvotes based on whether or not a person agrees, rather than whether the comment was on-topic and contributed to the conversation. I try to make a point of upvoting comments I disagree with, but that are clearly made in good faith in order to counteract this trend. I suppose this problem is a normal low entropy state in community moderated systems. It takes a lot more mental energy to moderate based on the value of the conversation rather than whether you personally agree.
- mook 6y agoThe older HTML equivalent would be to package it in a *.mhtml where the various parts are mime-encoded, like a multipart email would. It's only been around for decades. Creating it was saving a webpage in IE. Mozilla/Firefox never supported it, though, even though they already had the necessary code for doing email… possibly because they had inherited the Netscape mail codebase which was a bit difficult to reuse.