Re: HTML 5 and XHTML 2 combined

I believe you mean "Javascript" rather than Ajax in this case.

I'm not sure how much this helps, but the "Ajax" part of Javascript - i.e.
Javascript that can make an http request independent of a page refresh - was
an entirely non-standard Microsoft invention.  The fact that it has become
ubiquitously supported by Mozilla browsers, Webkit and Opera shows I believe
two things: one that vendors are hugely important in terms of browser
functionality, and also that specifications are not universally the right
answer or the only game in town.

I am a firm believer in the work of the w3c, and also that vendors should
not be given too much power, but as has been stated - ignoring them
completely may well end up with a pointless standard that no developer can
use.




2009/1/20 Molte <molte93@gmail.com>

> It's good you're able to use languages not supported by the browser by
> using Ajax, but after all it would be much greater and easy being able to
> use those languages directly.
>
> The thrust of the blog post is that I believe that browser vendors
>> have less and less 'control' than they used to have. But of course you
>> could argue that this is irrelevant, since as long as everyone
>> continues to believe that they are so important -- and that they hold
>> the key to the success or failure of a standard -- then they will
>> remain so.
>>
> Just to make it clear: I believe browser vendors *should *not have the
> power to choose which languages to be used, but still I believe they do.
> Actually I think we should show the browser vendors that they're not the
> only ones who needs to have something to say (not saying they're not
> listening to others).
>
> (I should add that I don't believe that browser vendors have a duty to
>> implement anything -- it's their software after all.)
>>
> I still believe it's crazy having both HTML 5 and XHTML 2, so if it all
> happened after by mind, they would not need to support so many languages.
>
> 2009/1/20 Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
>
> Hi Molte,
>>
>> > The problem just might be, that if the browser vendors do not like the
>> > language they can simply just avoid supporting it (just like going on a
>> > strike). And then what idea is there of a standard that is not supported
>> or
>> > used?
>>
>> It's interesting that the Ajax approach opens up the possibility of
>> building libraries to support new languages, even if the browser
>> vendors have decided not to implement those languages. I'm involved in
>> the XForms, XHTML 2 and RDFa specifications at the W3C, and have been
>> able to implement XForms and RDFa processors in JavaScript by using
>> the techniques pioneered by the Ajax innovators.
>>
>> (I should add that I don't believe that browser vendors have a duty to
>> implement anything -- it's their software after all.)
>>
>>
>> > It's just a question about who has the power to decide the future of the
>> > Web. The browser vendors? the coders/developers? "us"? or just everyone
>> in
>> > cooperation?
>>
>> This discussion reminds me of a blog post of mine from a few years
>> ago, "Ajax makes browser choice irrelevant...but we still need
>> standards" [1].
>>
>> In it I argue that the incredible things that people are doing with
>> Ajax libraries allows us to 'hide' the vagaries of different browsers,
>> which weakens the power of the browser vendors. Unfortunately, though,
>> whilst there are no standards for the Ajax libraries themselves, then
>> it makes it difficult for authors to build applications that they feel
>> confident could be ported to different libraries, should the need
>> arise.
>>
>> The thrust of the blog post is that I believe that browser vendors
>> have less and less 'control' than they used to have. But of course you
>> could argue that this is irrelevant, since as long as everyone
>> continues to believe that they are so important -- and that they hold
>> the key to the success or failure of a standard -- then they will
>> remain so.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> [1] <
>> http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/2006/09/ajax-makes-browser-choice-irrelevantbut.html
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Mark Birbeck, webBackplane
>>
>> mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com
>>
>> http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck<http://webbackplane.com/mark-birbeck>
>>
>> webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
>> 05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
>> London, EC2A 4RR)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hilsen
>
> Molte
>
> CosSinCalc
> http://cossincalc.com
>



-- 
Pete Otaqui
pete@otaqui.com
+44 7949 945542