On Friday 08 March 2002 10:32, Matthew Langham wrote: >. . . > We're talking the Mozilla browser here - right? Looking at the > current browser market share I fail to see why Mozilla is the > platform to aim for. Surely we should be trying for a solution that > works in IE as well. >. . .
A while ago we had a discussion about this (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100710398209305&w=2) I wrote this at the time: > ...IMHO a content editor could be seen and "marketed" as > a separate application - basing it on the Mozilla code base > (assuming it makes sense) would not necessarily mean saying > "Mozilla can now be used as a content editor" but could be "we > have a content editor, and the code is based on Mozilla, by the way". >. . . IE's market share today is no question, but I think many Open-Source folks resist (for good reasons, we want alternatives on the desktop, don't we?) to a solution that is locked to MS products. Also (I think it was Stefano who pointed this out), installing different versions of Mozilla side-by-side is no problem if needed, whereas it is impossible with IE. This can cause some administration fun if you need two different versions of IE (or even msxml I think) for different applications. -- Bertrand Delacrétaz (codeconsult.ch, jfor.org) buzzwords: XML, java, XSLT, cocoon, mentoring/teaching/coding. disclaimer: eternity is very long. mostly towards the end. get ready. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
