Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
dareo@m... (Dare Obasanjo) writes: >HTML is an appropriate mechanism for >building client applications. Then again, Tim Bray keeps claiming as >much so that may actually be your argument as ludicrous as it may >sound. Yeah, Dare, a lot of people find that outright ordinary. Heck, even obvious. And if certain companies would get around to supporting HTML, CSS, SVG, and heck, maybe even XForms, that'd be a lot easier for a lot of people than chaining themselves to Microsoft via XAML. >As Len has already pointed out, it is interesting to note that when >the Mozilla folks come up with XUL it is innovative use of XML but >when Microsoft does something similar it is "Replace & Defend" or >whatever is the new anti-Microsoft buzzphrase. XUL's not nearly as all-encompassing, and yes, I have doubts about that too, if smaller ones. Nor does Mozilla have the same kind of corporate muscles. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org
|
