- From: Michael Sokolov <msokolov@s...>
- To: stephengreenubl@g...
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:36:06 -0400
Browsers have always represented an impoverished development
environment targeted to the broadest possible audience. Unlike more
traditional apps (desktop, server), they are constrained by having to
run everywhere, on every device, with a single programming language
(ok, there used to be VB Script, and of course plugins). Is it any
wonder that the choice of tools is limited there?
The strange thing (as Jirka pointed out) is that XML *was already in
the browser*. Unlike Flash, say, it didn't have to fight for its place
there. It had it -- and lost it. Maybe for the reasons Jirka points
out, I don't know. Maybe because nobody cared much about coding in
javascript back then when all it was good for was image rollovers and
the other kinds of toy effects you could achieve with "dynamic html"
-Mike
On 04/29/2013 09:10 AM, Stephen D Green wrote:
CAA0AChVk=xkN4BUOacfX9pjfh61MtvLP+p6rc-F6hLYi-338=g@m..."
type="cite">
Is the major blocker something to do with developers
wanting everything to be free and take minimal effort
in areas of software technology, whereas with the more
expensive RDBMSs and app frameworks (expensive
for their tools support, etc at least) the will to invest time
and effort is already there sufficient for supporting XML?
--
Michael Sokolov
Senior Architect
Safari Books Online
|
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
|