Re: [Ming-users] Bit off subject - but related

[Erik H. <zo...@sm...>]

MDonoughe wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Erik Hill wrote:
>
> | I manage/made a graphical chat and Im considering exending its
> | ablitys.
> |
> | The system uses both a  internal sets and external single images..
> | the external being user defined done with ming.
> |
> | Im playing around with idea's on the internal sets as thay pose the
> |  biggest problem right now. each avatar image. Each  avatar image
> | is made up of anything from 4-8 diffent images. The images are all
> | grayscale and named in a certain order.
> |
> | This is done so the client it self can tint the diffent parts of
> | the image.. allowing customiseing of colors without any additional
> | bandwith use.
> |
> | The problem here is the amount of steps that need to be done by
> | hand, currently the end product being about 440kbs .. containing ..
> |  about 30-35 diffent avatar images with all the other graphics the
> | chat uses and some of them are animated. Not bad considering.
> |
> | Id like to automate the task how ever Im not sure ming is the
> | correct choice here. My experance with the attachMovie function is
> | that this limits to use with it when you load a movie inside
> | another movie, the libary of the movie isnt global, its restricted
> | to that clip. That would mean the avatar object/class would have to
> | be in that clip as well, as well as the menu. I dont know if ming
> | is upto that.
> |
> | Do you guys think it could work?
> |
> | My experance is also ming files with images are sugnificantly
> | bigger then the same images published in flash it self.
> |
> | I think the ideal thing would be to have it prepare a fla
> | file..allowing me to tweek and publish it on my computer however I
> | havent seen anything on doing something like that..
>
> I'm not sure exactly what you want, but I might have some ideas.
>
> You can try to make a small flash file that requests a text file off
> of the server(possible a script with an arguament) that will describe
> the avatar through ActionScript and then use multicolor to adjust the
> different layers.
> Pros: it might work
> Cons: might over load the server by requesting a plethora of text
> files at once, or use all of your bandwidth if the Flash player
> doesn't cache.
> ~    Can also crash slow computers
>
The discription and coloration is allready done though xmlsockets :)

> You can make your entire chat program in Flash. The whole chat and the
> relevent icon descriptions could all be in one text file that is
> grabbed periodicaly by the client(or possibly sent to the client).
> Pros: doesn't have the cons from the other option
> Cons: requires rewritting the chat program.
>
> The problem is that you need a program on the client side that will
> not need to be redownloaded and can change the hue. The obvious answer
> of making the Flash file using Ming and a query string does not save
> any bandwidth, as every avatar is it's own file to the browser. I
> can't come up with any other reasonable meathods.

Here is on the lines what im  thinking of changeing it to:
Say I have 3 files.
preloader.swf
client.swf - Actual Interface
avatar.swf - Default avatar sets (as in many sets) as well as the avatar 
object it self  400-500kbs

The reason why the preloader is in a diffent file, is the client is a 
bit first frame heavy.
Once the login is complete the client begins loading avatar.swf 
offscreen it also includes the client version... so perhaps something 
like this avatar.swf?version=1.02
Why? Iv had  vary good luck with cacheing ablitys of flash. This would 
only force avatar.swf to reload when the cache expired, the clients 
version changed, or the size of the file changed even though that dosent 
always cause it to be reloaded.

Unless thay have there settings set not to cache I can load avatar.swf 
anywhere in under a second.

when thay enter in to a room, the avatar.swf would load in a clip on the 
stage, on complete it would begin displaying.

A little bit on the usage of my server domain:

CODE ---- Description ---- Acesses ---- %
200            OK                    210,771       54.94
304            Not Modified     159,627       41.61

For 732MB's  of images and content .. I dont think 41% is bad.


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFBoFic7WlssggYu5IRAjcgAJ4uNQskh5PeM5yA8cuvy0BbZuRK6QCfaPti
> YOvn7qq9QhCufXkjsOb9xXE=
> =kiMl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>