W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2004

[whatwg] about rich internat applications

From: Brad Neuberg <bkn3@columbia.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:23:06 -0700
Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040609102221.01f8be40@pop.mail.yahoo.com>

>
>>To summarize, these three metrics are Reliability, Ease of Programmer 
>>Use, and Performance.  The reason I brought these up in a discussion of 
>>whether to put the emulation layer on the client or server sides is 
>>because if we can't achieve these three important metrics on the client 
>>side then we may have to do it on the server-side.
>There are (arguably) a lot of technologies that are easy to use and 
>perform well,that have never made it....what ever happened to Netscape's 
>LiveWire?  The most important metric is demographic majority.  From a 
>business perspective, none of our fortune 500 bosses are going to let us 
>touch a technology with little market penetration.  It's a sad fact of 
>life that most companies are still parsing for browser type as N4.7+ and 
>IE5.0+ only.    Thankfully, Mozilla and Opera are gaining ground...but 
>will I be able to persuade my stakeholders that this is a technology we 
>should put a resource to?  If it's in the best browsers, then it will have 
>a better chance than having an open-source plug-in server architecture 
>making the rounds.

Hi Frank. I wasn't arguing that reliability, ease of programmer use, and 
performance are enough for a standard to win; I was just emphasizing them 
because I wasn't hearing others talk about them, and I think they very 
important to a standard winning, though not enough.

Brad Neuberg 
Received on Wednesday, 9 June 2004 10:23:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:34 UTC