OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] The Browser Wars are Dead! Long Live the Browser Wars!

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Paul says he is out, so let me do him the courtesy 
of not CCing him.  All respect intended.

IMO, part custom client, part browser. Sometimes 
thick, sometimes fat.  The main point was that 
one doesn't have to drag HTML around all of the time. 
Other problems are dealing with statelessness.  Not 
every app should be loosely coupled.  The hard part 
is being open minded about when and where the system 
should be loosely coupled and when it should be stateful.

The web architecture for good reasons favors thin, 
loosely coupled, and stateless.  Java favored tossing 
away pointers.  All have good reasons but I don't 
think they always apply and having options depends 
on the framework one works in.  Given performance, 
security, concurrency, etc., we need the options 
and if an RFP comes in that is wall-to-wall web 
but still requires the other 95% or what is typical 
in the industry I work in, we have to decline that 
RFP.  A surprising number of these bids come back 
to us a year or so later with the web requirements 
severely deprecated or altogether removed.

We've been very successful with approaches that embed 
the browser control inside a form and use its API when 
neccessary.  Other times, we use the browser directly, 
and do the typical downtranslates to HTML.  Sometimes 
it makes sense to use a DOM, and other times, SAX or 
the XMLReader/Writer combinations.

Some of this, I believe, revolves around the approach 
that treats XML from the Infoset out instead of dealing 
directly with the syntax.   I like what I hear out of 
Redmond on these topics.  When?  That depends a lot on 
the .NET architecture in my case and on how the system 
libraries are made available to different types of 


From: Gerben Rampaart (Casnet Rotterdam) [mailto:Gerben@Casnet.net]

>What we have here is a failure to communicate. I'm out.

Please don't be like that. I enjoyed lurking the browser thread discussion
very much. I went wrong when people (Whoever) tried to explain that massive
apps could not be carried by a browser interface. Although the thread went
from the lack of support of modern (read:XML) technologies in IE to browser
use in Enterprise size Apps, it has still allot of relevance. But let's
indeed talk about user interfaces and not (for example) Transact-SQL, the
two are simply a few tiers too far away from each other.

I think the point Len tried to make is (&& If Wrong = True Then Correct(Me))
that browsers can cupport some ... but not the whole of an Enterprise app.
What is the answer then ? Thin-Client ? Part desktop app and part browser ?
And when ?


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS