On Sat, 15 Jan 2000, Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 06:53:59PM +0000, alex <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Unfortunately, libswf.a is not GPL, so what is the feasability of writing a > > gimp plugin for SWF? > > I don't see the problem (yet)? Plug-ins do not need to be GPL'ed (at least > not when the last rmeaining license bits have been resolved ;->) > > > The SWF file-format is open, so it could easily be reimplemented as some > > sort of GPL-thing. Another reason to reimplement it is that it is only > > available for Irix, BSD and Linux/x86. It would be a bit of a kludge, as > > Gimp clearly is not a vector graphics app. Your thoughts appreciated. > > At some distant future, gimp's vector capabilities will be vastly > improved. But at the moment there shouldn't be much incentive for a swf > plug-in. Re-implementing it as a GPL library (maybe LGPL is suited, > even), would be worthwhile despite this, however!!!! Actually from what I remember reading, Macromedia was going to open the shockwave format even more. Actually now that I found the link I realize it was the player itself. Needless to say, with what exists now from macromedia and the addition of the player, maybe an implementation would be even easier. here's the link regarding flash player: http://www.benews.com/story/2702.1.html Having said all that, Don't expect Macromedia to fully open up shockwave formats. If someone could write an open source flash type development tool, It couldn't be good financially for them. -- John E. Vincent http://www.lusis.org - opensource(libre) webhosting http://www.jyradelix.com - Jyradelix Designs http://www.lusis-integrations.com - Lusis Network Integration Consultants --------------- "Some people call me crazy but I prefer to think of myself as a freelance lunatic" - me
