- From: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
- Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:53:21 +0300
- To: public-html@w3.org
> > and about implementation of communication via SQL5 [3] over TCP (to avoid HTTP as redundant gasket [4]). > SQL was designed for database access SQL5 was designed including to satisfy other aims. > between > untrusted parties, which *is* what HTTP was designed for. I'm listening your arguments about superiority of HTTP over SQL5 (please, read *whole* http://sql50.euro.ru/sql5.16.4.pdf before answering) And the main: don't pay so much attention to particular question (traffic) - there are much more essential questions, i.e. http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/tabfile_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/cube_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/looker_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/tree_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/combo_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/quest_eng.htm#webforms_data http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/forxml_eng.htm http://html60.euro.ru/site/html60/en/author/hidden_eng.htm But help me to estimate cost (in money) of implementation of these much more essential items in different browsers: Firefox, Opera, etc.
Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2008 07:54:21 UTC