Thomas T. wrote:
> I don't want to go "overtime" on this, but yes I have to agree with
> your views. The web does not want to "behave" itself for Arachne.
> Bernie's development of Javascript support is way in the future, I think
> and it would need to be implemented by Michael P. CSS is good, though.
Well I'm not developing it anymore, and Michael is atleast working on it
in his head (and was before I started that was why he so easily saw what I
had done wrong in my approach, still... some of the things I wanted to do
would probably be better to add now and then get real JS support at a
later date instead of having no support at all as it is now).
> The real question is whether Arachne can survive in the current
> climate of e-commerce, dot-deadness, and such. Web standards.org is
> for limiting the Internet to only those who want to run high-end
> browsers. And no Dos, period.
But the question is if we really *need* this service now (https), most
companys that sell on the Net are still in the red and with the
".com-death" few will start new. I understand that there are problems for
those of us that want to use it, but often there are alternative ways of
communicating (phone for instance).
//Bernie
http://bernie.arachne.cz/
