7 Replies Latest reply on Jun 20, 2013 11:34 AM by mattbbcmk

    content delivery network vs. static HTML

    mattbbcmk

      Hey everyone,

       

      I just finished my first animation project in Adobe Edge Animate. Excellent! Now I want to publish my banner ad.

      When I go to publish the ad, I have the choice (in publish settings) of Frameworks via CDN or Publish as static

      HTML. I typically deliver my ads to a newspaper who hosts the ads for me. I would assume I need to save as

      CDN as opposed to static HTML. Is this correct?

       

      matt

        • 1. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
          elainecc Adobe Employee

          Hey, Matt-

           

          It's yor choice as to whether or not you host the frameworks via CDN.  In Animate 1.5, this means that you will be pointing to the version of jQuery that lives on Google's CDN, so chances are your users will probably have that version cached in their browser.  This will increase your download time.  In Animate CC, this means that you will be pointing to Google's CDN for jQuery and Adobe's CDN for the Animate runtime.  If you don't select this option, you will be dependent on a local version of these files when you publish.

           

          Static HTML is a different proposition entirely and has nothing to do with whether or not CDN is enabled.  Static HTML will output your text into your HTML to ensure that it's indexable via search engines.  Given that you're writing an advertisement, it's unlikely that you'll need it to be searchable, so you might want to consider leaving this off.

           

          Hope this helps guide your decision process!


          Thanks,

           

          -Elaine

          • 2. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
            mattbbcmk Level 1

            Thanks Elaine. That helps.

             

            Hmmm. Increased download time does not sound good. Is there another option I

            should be checkinhg that might help with this? Hopefully the newspaper will have

            no issues with implementing the HTML on their site.

             

            matt

            • 3. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
              mattbbcmk Level 1

              I guess I could publish for the web without CDN being checked...

              Would this make a difference?

               

              matt

              • 4. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
                elainecc Adobe Employee

                Hey, Matt-

                 

                Remember that CDN will actually decrease your download time because the chances of the user already having the libraries cached are higher.  When the user has the libraries cached, they do not need to download them again - the browser takes care of loading it from the local cache.  This has the overall effect of lessening your payload.

                 

                -Elaine

                • 5. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
                  mattbbcmk Level 1

                  Ok, glad I asked. However, the CDN option only works when Google is involved, right?

                  Or does it work with all browsers?

                   

                  One more question, I am hoping for help with: I used a glow filter around a product within my ad.

                  Firefox does not allow the glow to show but Google and Safari are fine. (unfortunately, it is a red

                  product on a red background so I need the glow. Or I could just choose another product).

                  So... if the ad is viewed on Firefox, I guess were just out of luck unless the poster image can be

                  shown in place of the animation. However, this would be a shame since the goal will be to have

                  this animation work within as many browsers and devices as possible.

                   

                  matt

                  • 6. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
                    elainecc Adobe Employee

                    Hey, Matt-

                     

                    For Animate 1.5, yes, jQuery served off of Google's servers, but it is browser-independent.  Think of Google as just another webserver in this case.  For Animate CC, jQuery is served off of Google's servers and the Animate runtime is served off of Adobe's servers.  All of this should be available regardless of what browser you use.

                     

                    Regarding the glow filter, CSS Filters are only supported by Webkit-based browsers.  Firefox is not a Webkit-based browser (whereas Chrome and Safari are), so filters are not supported.

                     

                    http://caniuse.com/#feat=css-filters

                     

                    Remember that the down-level stage (where you would post your poster image) is only displayed in browsers that do not support Animate content in general (mostly IE6-8), not just support or not support particular features that Animate makes available to the user.  Most people have gotten around this by using transparent PNGs to fake the glow to make the animation as cross-browser as possible.  While this is unfortunate, there's not much we can do to get out and push the browser's implementation of this standard.

                     

                    Hope that helps clarify things for you!

                     

                    -Elaine

                    • 7. Re: content delivery network vs. static HTML
                      mattbbcmk Level 1

                      Thank you for the time you took to answer my lengthy questions.

                      Your answers help to clarify what I can expect for publishing.

                       

                      My next goal will be to have the newspaper test my files.

                       

                      thanks,

                       

                      matt