[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 08:12:37 -0700
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE0DF7D8@h...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> This won't hunt, Paul.  No one is suggesting that MS will 
> torpedo SVG.  You want to redirect the topic away from 
> the one that disturbs you:  MS and yes, all of us, have 
> options. 

No, I want to direct it away from the topic that bores me. Here's what 
interests me.

You said: "The browser wars are over. The browser lost."

You are wrong on both counts, and that observation is completely 
orthogonal to the issue of XDocs. I don't care to talk more about XDocs 
until it is public.

 >...
> 2.  Innovations don't come from one source.  If the 
> libraries are powerful, we may get more innovation than 
> if the lockin constrains us.  Between patents and lockins 
> and fear of the W3C and loathing of the successful, 
> the web is stagnant. 

That's simply incorrect. Here are some points of innovation on the Web:

http://rss.benhammersley.com/archives/001444.html
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/10/16/021016hnearthblog2.xml?s=IDGNS
http://www.movabletype.org/trackback/
http://jabberzilla.mozdev.org/
http://xml.apache.org/batik/
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-foaf.html
http://www.croczilla.com/svg/
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/07/24/xmlportal.html
http://ipw.internet.com/site_management/site_tools/986419618.html
http://www.vultus.com/
http://www.mozdev.org/logs/top50.html
http://www.adobe.com/svg/main.html
http://books.slashdot.org/books/02/10/15/0124228.shtml?tid=154
http://plone.org/
http://subversion.tigris.org/
http://annozilla.mozdev.org/index.html

I agree that even so things are not moving as fast as they were five or 
ten years ago. That's not the same as saying they aren't moving.

> ... Time for fresh thinking not standards.
> Standards cut both ways.  If you want the kind of web 
> development we had five to ten years ago, we will have 
> to break some existing rules.  

The kind of web development we had five to ten years ago was *built* on 
the wide adoption of both de jure and de facto standards. If we are 
advancing slowly today, it is because it has been quite a while since a 
browser vendor took on a meaty new standard like SVG and nobody has 
gotten around to standardizing something like XUL, XBL or HTC.

> ... One of them just might 
> be that the browser, the universal interface, is not the 
> only viable platform.

Nobody ever said it was. It is merely the only platform with the 
features I listed and those features provide a basis for innovation and 
interoperability.

  Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • RE: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by Date: RE: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: Microsoft and vector graphics (Was:XDocs and XForms?)
• Next by thread: The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread