Talk:Adobe AIR: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:44, 7 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Adobe AIR article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 6 months

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wonderfl/Someguy

I reverted your recent edits to Adobe AIR. I wanted to explain in more detail on your user talk so you knew why:

The paragraphs you moved into "architecture" don't belong in architecture. Architecture should discuss the way AIR is designed/works, not what you can do with it
Renaming the "Frameworks" section to "ActionScript" is nonsensical
The sentence "Applications built without the framework depend entirely on the developer's own skills and artistic abilities, and are commonly known as "pure ActionScript" projects" is extremely unencyclopedic and defines a neologism with no source. Perhaps you are proud to make apps without AIR, but it doesn't belong in the article. Furthermore, the claim is nonsense - AIR does not include any features that reduce the "artistic abilities" required of the developer, and much of the functionality in AIR is not reproducible in vanilla AS3 so "skills" have nothing to do with it.
I disagree with your changes in wording under "AIR Native Extensions", particularly the change to "not yet available", which falsely implies that Adobe is planning to implement every feature from every ANE at some point in the future.

Some guy (talk) 07:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with some of your changes, disagree with others so have made improvements in the article to reflect.

Some of your points are fine, accepted. However you put too much stress on ANEs and AIR Gamepad when they are both minor features of the platform. Updated.
And about "pure actionscript" being non-encyclopedic, perhaps you should just do a little google search before making such claims. Refs added.
"Features" or "Architecture", whatever you call the section doesn't matter. The contents are similar so they should be merged. Edited.
No reason to remove Scout. A new and first-class tool built by Adobe specifically for FP and AIR. Re-added.
My section on "ActionScript" provides a complete overview on the methods to build an AIR app, with pure AS or with the Flex framework. They are both completely different methods and both have pros/cons. Learn up on the subject if you are unaware of these styles. Some components can only be used in pure AS projects, and some only work in Flex projects. Reworded and reorganized.
Reason for "Development" section being called "ActionScript": AS and JS are two contradictory methods to develop applications for AIR. Therefore most of the info in the development section like 3D and ANEs apply only to AS3 since such functions can only be accessed from AS3. See if the new organization is easier to understand.
Agree about the "artistic abilities" sentence. Preserved.
Agree about "not yet available". Preserved.
Rewrote the "Features" section intro to remove marketing-speak.
In response to : "Perhaps you are proud to make apps without AIR". I agree that section was worded in a confusing manner. Pure AS3 apps actually mean apps that are built without the Flex framework, not without AIR. Restructured under the "ActionScript applications" section.

You are welcome to improve the wording and content, but please don't revert entire sections due to minor issues/defects.

Wonderfl ^(reply) 08:31, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a stretch to call an SDK software. You are placing way too much emphasis on discussing Flex, which is a separate project. AIR is not merely an add-on for Flex, it is a separate framework but there is an SDK that combines both of them in addition to the standalone AIR SDK.
There is no need to explain that users can edit ActionScript in a text editor. That is possible with every programming language, and furthermore is a property of AS3, not AIR
There is no need for the "ActionScript" header. It is a poorly chosen title for a header (as it is also about Flex), the way the section is written falsely implies users have to choose between Flex and AS3 (AS3 is still used for writing functional code in Flex applications) and the section repeats information that is already covered elsewhere.
The publishing section was mostly redundant with the availability section directly after; I removed most of the publishing section and merged the table into the availability section.

Some guy (talk) 12:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with the SDK/software change, and you've re-written the SDKs section which is fine. Just add refs. And links.

The section does not falsely imply that Flex apps cannot contain AS3. The section starts with "ActionScript-based Adobe AIR applications". Anyways, I let it be deleted but brought back some of the old "pure AS3" stuff into the article.

The publishing section was not totally redundant. I re-added some of the points, specifically relating to the Captive Runtime.

Although some of your changes are annoying, you seem to be highly proficient and non-argumentative. And most of your points are valid. I've had much worse arguments on WP. Thanks for your cooperation and whatever else you bring to the table.

BTW, something must be done about the JS section. Its a total misfit. I kept adding "ActionScript" as a category heading simply to differentiate between JS and AS development for AIR. Any ideas?

Wonderfl ^(reply) 12:47, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page, per the discussion below, not just because the name is official, but because it is also more common. Dekimasuよ! 22:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adobe Integrated Runtime → Adobe AIR – The official name used by Adobe on the AIR website - http://www.adobe.com/products/air.html Wonderfl ^(reply) 08:10, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: In its current state, the article does not even mention the name "Adobe Integrated Runtime", because the nominator just completely removed that name from the article. That doesn't look proper to me at first glance, and I will proceed to restore it. I don't think that name should be removed from the article, even if the requested move is agreed. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the "Adobe Integrated Runtime" name because Adobe does not officially use the acronym on any of their websites. See the AIR site, the AIR labs site, as you can see "Adobe AIR" is the only terminology in use. We should stick to the official naming scheme instead of expanding the acronym. Wonderfl ^(reply) 07:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Adobe Integrated Runtime" has sometimes been used, and is still sometimes used even today by Adobe itself (e.g., in the heading of this EULA and the headline of this press release) and by others (e.g., in this CNET article and many, many others that I will not bother to list). So I think it is helpful to the reader to include that naming – especially as it seems to explain the origin of "AIR". However, I think it is probably true that "Adobe AIR" is used more, so I Support the move request. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the proposed title mean "Adobe Adobe Integrated Runtime"? Dekimasuよ! 08:26, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Funny thought, yes, but not really applicable since its the official name, used by Adobe and almost everywhere in the industry nowadays. Nobody says "Adobe Integrated Runtime", just as nobody says "Structured Query Language". "SQL" is de-facto, so is "Adobe AIR". 'Nuff said. -- Wonderfl ^(reply) 11:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It's a little odd, but it is what it is, and it achieves the goal of identifying whose technology it is while also providing a cute pronounceable name. There are other examples of "breaking the rules" and doing other unusual things with acronyms/initialisms – e.g., GNU and other recursive acronyms, backronyms, and other -onyms. Some are discussed in the acronym article. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:24, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I should at least have read the rest of the talk page, which brought up the question several times already. Dekimasuよ! 22:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Archive needs cleanup

Some sections from this month are already archived at Talk:Adobe AIR/Archive 1 while other sections from 2007 remain on this page. It's not clear why this was done, but requires cleanup and sorting. Dekimasuよ! 22:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some done, but the archive is still out of order. Dekimasuよ! 22:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I created an archive to get the irrelevant content out of the way, its not a historical archive. Many of the sections are still relevant and valid, and need to be dressed in the article. Sections such as Silverlight, Google Gears, Examples, Anatomy of AIR, etc. The only sections that are not relavant any more are the ones that deal with the naming. Since the article has just been renamed thanks to you. -- Wonderfl ^(reply) 23:58, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just moved some of the sections still relevant back into the talk page. I hope its not an issue? Just trying to preserve some of the valuable comments raised by the community, since Adobe AIR gets very little attention. -- Wonderfl ^(reply) 00:02, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is Adobe Air ?

This article is written in technical jargon, so it is not understandable to the normal reader.

Just like another writer above, I came to this page trying to discover why Adobe Air had mysteriously appeared on my computer without my permission, and whether it was needed to run ordinary functions like a PDF reader etc.

Please would someone knowledgeable rewrite (at least) the introduction to let ordinary PC users figure whether it is useful or not ? Many thanks ! Darkman101 (talk) 23:54, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adobe AIR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]