On Monday, Jul 28, 2003, at 12:24 US/Pacific, Todd W. wrote: [..]
Remember, I am of the "this AND that" philosophy, so you can walk, run, dirt[..]
bike, or staddle two bandwagons at the same time if you like, and, as long
as you get where you are going, I will agree that it was done correctly.
The challenge as we all understand is how to 'understand the actual technology' whether perl, php, java, <newBuzzHere> and how to glue the correct ones together...
Especially given the 'evolution' of XHTML, et al, and the chances that the 'new buzzWidgetWingDingDingFoo' will actually be implemented in 'the browser'....
I actually did note the
[..]Also, I hope youre reading, as qoted that, "I WOULDN'T like to call it the canonical perl MVC pattern..."
but well, you know, it wouldn't make a good rant if one were too constrained by the mere facts.....
I shall also have to peek at the AxKit - eg:
<http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2002/03/12/axkit.html>
yes?
and again, of course, the usual problem of
what is suppose to be on the server-side
as opposed to what is suppose to be on the client-sideand how do we go about solving those sorts of things.
As well as whether or not we can provide
"The "Semantic Web" is coming to a browser near you
(real soon now ;-). One of the biggest academic concerns
about the web is the lack of semantic content."and this in an article dated March 13, 2002....
{ would this be the wrong time to talk about '64-bit
architectures' - and whether or not one should be
planning on getting that new cool CPU with the fully
implemented 64-bit kernel.... }Or would that be in the same space as why we must all abandon perl5 because perl6 is the hot wave???
ciao drieux
---
Irony? What Irony?
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
