Repository navigation
Conversation
|
How does it differ from ruffle demo? |
|
The ruffle demo requires the internet to run and loads slowly when the internet connection is slow. |
|
What about the embedded "SWF player" of the browser extension? |
|
In some situations, like on public PCs or for educational purposes, it might not be convenient to install the Ruffle browser extension. Also, some countries/regions block access to the Chrome Web Store, or the access might be slow. |
Yeah, that's when you try to use it as a website, but when you build it locally (the same way you do with your package) you can use it offline. |
|
Websites you build yourself can't run directly on file:// origins (for example, double clicking the HTML will not work). If someone wants to run SWF animations, they also need to run an HTTP server themselves, which is not convenient in some situations. |
|
The desktop version of Ruffle Player doesn't support Windows 7 or older, which are still used in some places, like schools. However, the latest web version of Ruffle Player can still run on Chrome/Edge 109 that’s compatible with Windows 7. |
|
I think this should be a separate project, not merged into Ruffle. The use case is pretty niche |
this is a case #3008 |
Description
Add a standalone HTML player that doesn't rely on any platform. This uses a webpack fork (webpack-packager) to help build a single-file, self-contained HTML.
Testing
Test whether the generated player.html file can play SWF, and generate a player that embeds SWF, without external js/wasm/swf files needed.
Checklist