> Exactly. > We don't want someone adding <cfFooBar> to their engine, whilst > another uses > <cfBarFoo> (or doesn't have it at all). Ideally I can take a project > and run > it with no changes on Adobe, or Railo, or Smith, or BD, or ...
So i guess this means the CFML language is now set in stone forever? Or by "someone", do you just mean "someone other than Adobe"? I've seen this atitude time and again in the CF community: when Adobe introduces new syntax it's innovative, but when another vendor does it's disruptive. Last year some Adobe fanboy was bitching out the NA list because the syntax of the cfthread tag is different in BD 7 and CF 8 - only to have it come to light that NA implemented cfthread before Adobe, and that it was up to Adobe to maintain compatibility. Read Vince's reply here: http://www.newatlanta.com/c/products/bluedragon/self_help/archiveSearch/detail?messageId=221043 (yadda yadda wrap) > If Adobe don't want to open up their ColdFusion server (fair enough), > the > least they could do would be to set up some sort of language standard, > and a > public process to get it altered. Unlikely, IMHO. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. What you're proposing just makes it easier for others to compete with them. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:300980 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
