[OT] Re: Short forum post on REST API

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:inaa6r$27f3$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Am 03.04.2011 08:59, schrieb Nick Sabalausky:
>> "Daniel Gibson" <metalcaedes at gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:in889j$knb$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>
>>> If it helps killing Flash I'm fine with WebGL,
>>
>> My immeditate reaction is to agree with you on that, because direct
>> experience as both a flash-user and as a flash-developer has given me a
>> strong personal hatred towards Flash. But, if WebGL is driven by 
>> in-browser
>> JS (as I *think* it is, not that I've studied it closely), then I dunno,
>> suddenly Flash doesn't sound quite so bad anymore. Heck, at the very 
>> least,
>> Flash is already in byte-code when it's distributed, and the
>> "JS-as-the-web's-asm" idea just gives me a rash. Plus it's cleaner/easier 
>> to
>> block flash than to block specific JS features. Etc.
>
> But Flash is a notorious security hole, sometimes crashes the browser, ...
>

Yea, like I said, I do hate flash. It's just that pitting it against JS 
strikes me as the age-old "shit sandwich vs giant doucebag" debate. (/me 
tips hat to South Park)

>>
>>> [If it helps killing Flash I'm fine with] HTML5-videotag
>>
>> I dunno. The thing that still bugs me about that is we *already* had the
>> object tag,
>
> The problem was that there were different codecs for videos (windows 
> media, real
> media, ...) and often websites prompted you to install their codec.. which
> sometimes distributed malware etc.
> It's better to have a video tag with a standard codec that is supplied by 
> the
> browser.
>

The W3C could just as easily have said "use the object tag, use the X codec; 
any using-a-special-codec feature of the object tag is depricated".