Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Umm... PDF and Flash aren't painting to the same device contexts are they, say one in which a 2D circle is drawn alongside a 3D spinning sphere? I get in over my head at this point, but as I recall, the MS experience with Chrome was less than efficient, in fact, a dog. So, we can level the playing field but not the players. In some sense, a composite document is like an all-stars game in which the problems of behavioral fidelity and performance can only be met by the very best players, and then only in a given location on a given day. It is rough enough to get all the components to work realiably, the composite forces the author to also consider if his audience has all these players, is willing to download what he doesn't have, or says, Pass. So it becomes very quickly, caveat vendor. len -----Original Message----- From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:jborden@m...] > Reliability and behavioral fidelity are twins. > This sort of thing really outs in real time > 3D rendering systems. The abstract idea of > namespaced composite vocabularies is great; > I am wondering if it is a concept that works > fine for data systems that do the sort of thing > relational dbs do with tables, but falls apart > the closer one gets to the renderer in the > pipeline. > Optimization and caching. That is the job of the renderer. I assume a renderer would not download a plugin each time a namespace qualified element were encountered. At least I know that my browser does not download the PDF or Flash plugin each time a document is encountered. Heck a really smart renderer might even optimize across downloaded plugins. I just want to create a level playing field in which namespace names can be used as URIs and in which any inefficiencies so created can be optimized away when something is demonstrated to be an actual rather than theoretical bottleneck (remember that Ma Bell said the Internet would never work on theoretical basis, perhaps it doesn't but nonetheless here we are.)
|
