power
> MTeF> :-)
>
> Oh really... :)
Just tell me about something that you would like to implement as DW's
extension and you can't due to the API's limitations
> How exactly does an extremely small subset of DOM 1 that is
> implemented unevenly across the different objects qualify as
> powerful? To say nothing of DOM 2 or 3.
See above, what part of DOM 2 or 3 do you need inside the API, and why?
> How does the fact that all the menus are very nicely defined in XML
> files, but no one has thought to distribute DTD's of any kind qualify
> as well documented?
Do you really feel like it's so hard to read without a DTD?
Do you think HS's stuff is better documented?
> How can DW's data connectivity compare in any regard to ADO for power?
I never felt the need to connect to a datasource from a DW's extension, but,
apart from C++, you can leverage Flash Remoting too
> DW allows only JS or C, HS allows any language built on WSH, meaning
> VBS, JS, Kix, etc., and any language a COM object can be written in.
There is a huge difference here, DW API are cross-platform.
> Why the heck is DWFile so slow?
How many files you need to process with it? I used it for up to 2-3.000
files testing my site-wide extensions, it does the job, I never felt the
need for anything faster (remember it's cross platform too)
> I also can't speak to the C API, knowing very little C, but how many web
> developers know C?
I don't, but I was still able to do a few not too trivial things using DW's
API
> The only thing going for DW is the UI extensibility, which is awesome,
And leaves HS in the dust here... :-)
Try this for example:
http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=A1EDDF56F77EE7CA
> I can't help but feel that the whole DW
> extensibility thing has not enough resources, meaning people working
> on it, or it has too many, and not enough organization. Maybe it's
> because it has to run on the Mac as well that is holding it back.
I am not pretending DW's API is perfect, but I stand by my words saying that
I strongly disagree with your statement about HS's extensibility being more
powerful or better documented
> I think Mozilla is the model of what DW extensibility model want's to be.
> XUL/XBL/XPCOM kicks butt...or even HTML/DOM2/XML Events. Whatever the
> solution is, DW needs it. It's really lagging.
Well, actually DW predates Mozilla, the XML menus were based on the very
early draft of XUL (back in 1999)
----------------------------
Massimo Foti
Certified Dreamweaver MX Developer
Certified Advanced ColdFusion MX Developer
http://www.massimocorner.com/
----------------------------
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
