On Monday, June 20, 2005 11:48 PM Tim Daly wrote:
> i agree standards are a *good thing*(TM) but standards come
> after practice, not before.
On the contrary, many standards have value even though they
may never be put into practice. Standards (should) drive design.
But standards are meant to be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> i am trying to avoid 1.2 million lines of javascript with browser
> dependent ifdefs. we already have that problem with C. instead of
> trying to work "on top" of the browser, which limits our abilities
> to the current available set, i'm trying to think
--- Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On June 20, 2005 7:35 PM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> > we're trying to build a research science platform, not a
> > display GUI object. we'd like the GUI piece of the system to
> > have a clean, programmable semantics so we can reason about
> > user actions. we w
On June 20, 2005 7:35 PM Tim Daly wrote:
> ...
> some sort of browser-like capabilities are assumed.
Yes, most certainly. As usual, I find I agree with many things
you say below, but disagree strong on some specific points.
> the limitations we have now seems to be things like:
>
> * the syntax
