people actually believe. You and I may make our decisions based on what
is best for us and/or the organizations that we work with. However,
many others will look at what Macromedia is doing and take that as an
endorsement. And not to be mean, but it doesn't matter what you use on
your sites; it matters what Macromedia uses. They know it too, why else
did they redo the whole thing in CFML in the first place if they
weren't aware of it?
-Matt
On Feb 8, 2004, at 2:12 PM, Simon Horwith wrote:
> I can say that as of the last time I spoke with folks at Macromedia,
> the use
> of any framework or software on their site is not meant to be taken
> as an
> official endorsement of it... which makes sense. I experiment with
> vendor
> products on sites I build all the time... it doesn't necessarily mean
> I
> endorse them, just that I'm checking out what they have to offer.
>
> ~Simon
>
> Simon Horwith
> CTO, Etrilogy Ltd.
> Member of Team Macromedia
> Macromedia Certified Instructor
> Certified Advanced ColdFusion MX Developer
> Certified Flash MX Developer
> CFDJList - List Administrator
> http://www.how2cf.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Samuel R. Neff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 February 2004 19:11
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
>
> I think there's a difference between coming out and supporting a
> framework/standard/whatever and using it themselves. Simply using a
> framework for a portion of their own applications is not like
> they're
> saying
> everyone should use it. Quite to the contrary, none of the DRK
> code uses
> fusebox or Mach-II and that's much more of an insight into
> Macromedia's
> considered best practices (at least on the surface).
>
> Sam
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Blog: http://www.rewindlife.com
> Charts: http://www.blinex.com/products/charting
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 2:05 PM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: Re: Macromedia.com running on top of Mach II
> >
> > Of course, there is the point of view that Sun doesn't
> > promote the use of any one framework or methodology. In fact,
> > they don't even imply their preferred framework by making use
> > of one. Further, even if any particular Java vendor promoted
> > a specific framework it wouldn't have implications for the
> > whole community since there is more than one vendor.
> >
> > At this point in time, the CFML community hasn't really
> > accepted the multi-vendor paradigm we now find ourselves in.
> > Thus, when Macromedia even implies a favorite that tells the
> > community something very important. Personally, I think
> > Macromedia would do better to stay away from getting involved
> > with frameworks, methodologies, and standards. It is a no win
> > situation since whichever effort they support, the other
> > efforts will feel slighted. It shouldn't be that way...
> > Macromedia should want to support everything and anything
> > that the CFML community produces, but of course it is
> > impossible to support everything.
> > Therefore, they shouldn't support anything in particular.
> >
> > I think Sean Corfield's coding standards document is a
> > perfect example of where a useful contribution has turned
> > into something else entirely.
> > There are many people who now consider the content of those
> > documents to be official from Macromedia, which can't be
> > further from the truth.
> > Those documents didn't take into account the communities
> > point of view; they were decided on by Sean and his team.
> > Further, they don't even match the conventions used in CF's
> > documentation over the years.
> >
> > -Matt
> >
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
