On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 10:56 AM, _why <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the note of sandboxing, I think Chrome has made me ditch my prior > ideas about how I want to handle security in Shoes. (Because that's > the big problem here, not a bunch of little platform bugs.)
Truth. > I still think Shoes is best suited to compete with GUI toolkits > (since they are just so lousy) rather than to take on Flash. But > once Shoes is solid, I hope to get cracking on the security stuff > and, well, who knows what's in store after that. That makes sense, but I suppose efforts such as Chrome and Adobe AIR make me wonder what the boundarylines between "Web" and "GUI" land will be... Chrome seems to be fundamentally a webapp platform in its visual/interaction design rather than mainly a 90's era browser (the ability to create Application shortcuts, the full screen & not-really-a-status-bar layout, and the Gears LocalCache / DB, Geolocation and Desktop file access). AIR errs slightly more on the desktop GUI side, but interestingly embeds an entire WebKit usable as in widgetized form. I guess what I'm saying is that whether GUI toolkits start embedding WebKits (a la AIR) or Chrome and co. start embedding richer 90's era-class GUI features (a la Silverlight), the line (between what is Web and what is GUI) seems way blurrier than it was earlier this decade, and it just makes me wonder what newer GUI toolkits such as Shoes should "know" or "do" about the Web at large. On another note, I wonder what the party stance on barefootery is?! I've built up enough barefoot volume over the summer to be able to hike decent grade hills for a couple of miles barefoot, and I think my ligaments / tendons / anterior tibialis etc. are better for it. Sometimes Shoooes are the worst!! -- http://lwu.vox.com/library/post/dhike.html _whytheluckyshoes? yes! ordinary Shoooes? nooo... ~L
