Vi mangler .Net til din browser. Kod din applikation i JS eller et andet scripting sprog og afvikl den i en 'Google Gear' box. Sidstnævnte i en generisk form skulle indbygges i din favorit browser.
/Sik
We need .Net for your browser. Make your code in JS or what ever scripting language you prefer. Run the code in your browser in a 'Google Gear' box and all is set. A generic version of GG built into your favorite browser.
/Sik
Quote
Standardizing on a single language puts too many eggs in the browser's basket.
By Neil McAllisterAugust 21, 2008
The more I hear about the ongoing efforts to revise the leading Web standards, the less convinced I am that we're approaching Web-based applications the right way.
The latest dust-up involves ECMAScript, the international standard that forms the basis of the JavaScript language. Last week, the committee in charge of the language voted to abandon the proposed ECMAScript 4 standard in favor of a much less ambitious revision, dubbed ECMAScript 3.1.
Had the work continued, it would have brought big changes. "Programming 'in the large' has been a problem with untyped languages like JavaScript," Adobe's Ed Rowe told me in an interview earlier this year. "That's why Adobe has been working with [ECMA] on ECMAScript 4 ... to introduce concepts that are compatible with building large-scale applications."
[...]
Read more: http://weblog.infoworld.com/archives/emailPrint.jsp?R=printThis&A=http://weblog.infoworld.com/fatalexception/archives/2008/08/was_javascript.html
Ingen kommentarer:
Send en kommentar