W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > August 2003

RE: Comprehensive Summary of the Issues?

From: Scott Cadillac <scott@xmlx.ca>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 18:32:15 -0600
To: <public-web-plugins@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000001c36f57$53afe4a0$5400a8c0@mercury>

Thank you for clarifying your post Rui,

If we leave the politics out of it, I think we are very much on the same
page here - including the potential impact this has on the non-Microsoft
crowd.

I may work with MSIE exclusively, but that doesn't mean I can't appreciate
how far reaching this could be.

Details and time-lines is what we need.....

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-web-plugins-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-web-plugins-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rui Carmo
> Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 12:48 PM
> To: scott@xmlx.ca
> Cc: public-web-plugins@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Comprehensive Summary of the Issues?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sábado, Ago 30, 2003, at 17:53 Europe/Lisbon, Scott Cadillac wrote:
> 
> >
> > Interesting musings Rui,
> 
> Thanks, but my musings are not the point here. It's just a collection 
> of links I found while analysing the issues and a first step 
> at gauging 
> the impact on web designers, usability, and standartization.
> 
> > Please express yourself, but don't call this a 
> comprehensive summary 
> > while
> > editorializing your opinion at the same time.
> 
> I was not (at all) referring to my musings as a comprehensive summary 
> on the issues this list was created to debate. If you take 
> the time to 
> re-read my original posting, you will see that they are only 
> what lack 
> of information (most notably the lack of the aforesaid 
> summary) led me 
> to reflect on.
> 
> Allow me also to make clear that I'm not an editor of 
> anything, merely 
> someone trying to figure out what the actual situation is and 
> coming up 
> blank, because:
> 
> 1) It is not clear whether the court ruling has impact on 
> ActiveX, the 
> (originally Netscape, I think) plugin architecture (and hence 
> Flash) or 
> applets.
> 2) We do not know the alternatives Microsoft presented to the 
> W3C (and 
> are hence unable to gauge the impact of any of them)
> 3) We have yet to find a statement from Eolas where it is 
> clear whether 
> they will (or won't) consider suing any other browser 
> developers (which 
> might affect Mozilla, Safari, Opera, etc.)
> 
> > This issue affects so many of us in so many different ways, that I 
> > think the
> > only way to get through this is to focus on the technical issues
> > objectively.
> 
> I second that. But as someone else posted earlier, we can't focus on 
> technical issues without knowing more. As far as we know, 
> there is not 
> single compilation of legal issues, technical issues, or 
> alternatives. 
> There are also very few statements on the issue (being 
> Saturday, that's 
> understandable...).
> 
> Maybe someone at the W3C (given its neutrality), could start 
> compiling 
> a FAQ on this?
> 
> > The case for standardization and conformity for public 
> websites is one
> > thing, but I'm a private Intranet developer and I'm more 
> interested in 
> > the
> > impact on the business solutions I provide with MSIE.
> 
> I can understand that perfectly, but despite the 
> (predictable) brouhaha 
> from the Open Source community given this (and I quote) "blow to 
> Microsoft's dominance", this does not seem to affect only MSIE. They 
> were just the best target.
> 
> > Right now we are all short on technical details and some time-frame 
> > for the
> > changes.
> >
> > Thank you for your links, some of these look very interesting. 
> > Cheers....
> 
> I recommend perusing the Eolas news page (people wanting to skip my 
> rants can go directly to it): http://www.eolas.com/news.html - it is 
> short on scope and specifics, but maybe someone can glean useful 
> information from the postings (some require subscriptions to 
> the online 
> newspaper editions, which I don't have).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rui Carmo
> http://mac.against.org
> 
Received on Saturday, 30 August 2003 20:33:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:07:55 GMT