Rick Strahl
04-13-2000, 12:24 AM
I have to take serious issue with Glenn Davis in his 'Coded into a corner'
editorial.
I'm all for standards if companies will actually try to follow them. Microsoft
of all the companies (what all 2 of them that have a browser worth mentioning????)
at least takes a pretty good stab at implementing the standards. What's the
alternative? Netscape? Gimme a break - that browser even in its 'new 6.0'
version still has non-existent support for DHTML, barely supports CSS (obvious
the Cascading concept of CSS has escaped Netscape) and without digging I
can't find XML support either. Heck it can't even display an XML document.
If that's what Glenn means by standards compliant I'll stick with Microsoft
any day and won't be looking back. Never mind that you can actually do something
useful with Microsoft's browser in YOUR own applications. Plug in a browser,
access Web content from within an application, pull XML from the Web and
use it locally or send it back up to the server. Never mind that you can
take advantage of XML in IE today not 'when the next version ships' and without
having to roam the net for an XML parser that actually works, let alone be
easy to use in an application (how you're going to use that Java parser in
a non-java application?).
Frankly I'm tired of these obvious academians who sit around and mull theories
in their head without much consideration for the real world. This is how
we get standards that are inadequate or incomplete to begin with. Standards
need to evolve and this means innovation and change in the standards.
Compatibility is important and if standards are a way to achieve it - fine.
But pointing the finger at one company is ridiculous. Show me somebody who's
doing better and doing it right! We have to get the job done today and not
wait 'til next year and HOPE somebody gets it right. If compatibility is
your concern Netscape is hardly the answer especially now with the whole
AOL thing behind it.
You can bet your *** that Microsoft will not put itself in a compromising
position where an important standard is concerned. If that breaks compatibility
but is vital to development I have faith that it will be done right to support
both. MS is arrogant maybe, but stupid - no way.
+++ Rick ---
Rick Strahl
West Wind Technologies
----------------------
http://www.west-wind.com/
editorial.
I'm all for standards if companies will actually try to follow them. Microsoft
of all the companies (what all 2 of them that have a browser worth mentioning????)
at least takes a pretty good stab at implementing the standards. What's the
alternative? Netscape? Gimme a break - that browser even in its 'new 6.0'
version still has non-existent support for DHTML, barely supports CSS (obvious
the Cascading concept of CSS has escaped Netscape) and without digging I
can't find XML support either. Heck it can't even display an XML document.
If that's what Glenn means by standards compliant I'll stick with Microsoft
any day and won't be looking back. Never mind that you can actually do something
useful with Microsoft's browser in YOUR own applications. Plug in a browser,
access Web content from within an application, pull XML from the Web and
use it locally or send it back up to the server. Never mind that you can
take advantage of XML in IE today not 'when the next version ships' and without
having to roam the net for an XML parser that actually works, let alone be
easy to use in an application (how you're going to use that Java parser in
a non-java application?).
Frankly I'm tired of these obvious academians who sit around and mull theories
in their head without much consideration for the real world. This is how
we get standards that are inadequate or incomplete to begin with. Standards
need to evolve and this means innovation and change in the standards.
Compatibility is important and if standards are a way to achieve it - fine.
But pointing the finger at one company is ridiculous. Show me somebody who's
doing better and doing it right! We have to get the job done today and not
wait 'til next year and HOPE somebody gets it right. If compatibility is
your concern Netscape is hardly the answer especially now with the whole
AOL thing behind it.
You can bet your *** that Microsoft will not put itself in a compromising
position where an important standard is concerned. If that breaks compatibility
but is vital to development I have faith that it will be done right to support
both. MS is arrogant maybe, but stupid - no way.
+++ Rick ---
Rick Strahl
West Wind Technologies
----------------------
http://www.west-wind.com/