Daniel L. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 04:31, Karsten Hilbert wrote: ...snip... >> What I want to say is that I don't think a browser is the best >> choice for a prescribing client. > > I believe that the browser is useful for development because it > minimises the time spent on developing the presentation layer and can be > platform independent. (Once the engine is built, you can spend all the > time you have at your disposal on developing and tweaking the > presentation layer to make the user efficient or to impress the top > brass.)
Dan, That's true in theory but alas, not always the case in practice. Our experience is that a lot of time is wasted trying to work around the limitations of HTML, and/or dealing with the differences in which the various browsers (and versions of browsers) interpret HTML and CSS. And don't get me started on Javascript and the differences between the DOMs used by different browsers. Much of this grief can be avoided by avoiding Javascript and some aspects of HTML and CSS, but the first thing anyway says about the resulting applications is "Gee it would be nice if they were a bit more interactive...", or "Gee, its a bit slow (because in the absence of extensive use of Jvascript or embedded Java, every single interaction involves a round-trip to the Web server)." Tim C
