[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I think we agree. The developer has to be able to choose.
Maxims that enable work to the developer and end user's
advantage. Maxims that restrict hobble. Caveat emptor.
The web frameworks have to enable, and the web architecture
has to be above this fray.
It will be interesting to see if browsers can be both
competitive and standard without everyone devoting a
lot of energy to rigging the standards and I do mean
everyone.
Study Chrome, because you are right,
supporting too many solutions has a way of dragging
down the browser.
len
From: bryan [mailto:bry@itnisk.com]
>What is more questionable in the assertion made elsewhere that
>hypertext (eg browser based web pages) is the
>only realistic client for the web. It condemms complex
>operations to novice mode. Because any compute
>process is linearizable doesn't mean it is a good idea
>for any given case.
Certainly doesn't mean it's a bad idea for every case either. Anyway the
linearity of a solution may be bad or good depending on how many other
solutions the architecture supports and on how that architecture allows
the solution to interact with other solutions in its space.
>Previous, Next, etc. condemn
>one to be novice forever and given a poor cache,
>a lot of traffic to move when it would be better
>to load a coarser chunk to a smarter client.
Yeah but the problem there is that the page which is loaded into the
browser, the browser being the novice interface, can have an attendant
expert interface/capabilities, the novice interface hosts the advanced.
I'll admit that one doesn't see this too often, but it sometimes does
happen.
|
