W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Amazon Silk

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:47:29 +0300
Message-ID: <CAJQvAuf+nmKNW6RJX5p1eioEznDS39_u8_6-YGCRhnrqAxkyig@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-tag@w3.org
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> I will reiterate (for the nth time) that it would be valuable for the W3C to
> specify what a "browser" is, in the sense of what protocols, formats and
> standards it supports and uses when you feed it a URL. Then it could point a
> finger at Amazon and say "that's not a browser, and it's bad because..."

I expect it not to be fruitful for the W3C to define what a browser
is--especially if the definition would exclude Silk.

I, for one, think that the Opera Mini thin client and the server part
of Opera Mini form a browser and that it's an implementation detail
how the parts are spread across computing devices. I think it's more
useful to think of Opera Mini or Silk as distributed (in the
distributed computing sense) browsers than as a browser and a proxy,
because the parts are tightly coupled and you don't get to swap one
part without the other.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2011 13:48:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:40 GMT