Douglas Crockford – Yahoo
John Resig – Mozilla
Andre Charland – Nitobi
Aza Raskin – Humanized
– A gradual step is important, mainly because the browsers just don’t adhere to the specifications that are laid out for them.
– Gradual is easier to sell and bite off, more likely to bring the community along with it.
– No upgrade path from ECMA 3 to 4. typeof(null) == object, but will return null. There shouldn’t need to be a significant upgrade between the current and next version of ECMAScript.
-Its not just FireFox, lots of browsers are trying to quickly adopt and push out JS 2.
Does mozilla have a response to these problems coming up in ECMAScript 4?
– It will help development and performance. He generally seems for it.
Browser innovation probably shouldn’t happen, the frameworks should do it. At least then we have cross-browser support. We should rely on the frameworks since we don’t want a repeat of the browser wars which are very disruptive.
– The libraries are consolidating, they are beginning to look the same. Maybe in a year after they all converge to one point, we should refactor this logic into the browsers as the methodology has been decided.
– Agree’s, we have a lot of great libraries but developers need bits from all of them.
Resig (in response to Charland)
– We haven’t had to scramble after each of the latest browser releases. There hasn’t been many new features and there isn’t much that we have had to work around for each of the new browsers. XMLHTTP for local files has an issue so we had to backtrack on that, so they implemented one new feature and it was buggy. (a joke I’m sure)
– The difference between innovation now and later is that it used to be willy nilly, now we are on a path with some sign-posts.
– The browsers releasing new versions gives them an opportunity to improve the browser features not just the DOM or CSS model. So new browser releases are good and we shouldn’t just despise them for possibly breaking new things.
– There is no other environment where we have to plan for the possibility of our environment not being available.
Do you think there’s space for vendors in the AJAX space?
– Some companies want to buy software, even though the top 4 frameworks are open source, they still want to pay for the library. Though why not use the library and pay for the support? Thats the dinosaur of corporate world.
If there was one specific thing we can get from MS for IE what would it be? And how would we get that?
– The thing I would most like to get from IE is a kill switch. If we could kill IE 5.
– A really good debugger, they NEED a firebug.
– A bunch of things would be nice, but there’s nothing in particular, I’ll just say a W3C compatible eventing model.
– Not quite sure.
– Google Gears *cough*
– I agree, gears has great potential.
Multiple versions of the libraries?
Not understanded question, something about Flash, Flex and Silverlight.
– We have to fix the web or it becomes irrelevant as a platform. As AIR could take over platform.
Why choose between the meekly supported SVG and Canvas if Flash is everywhere?
– Most browsers support it, mostly everyone (except ie). And I have been using it a lot.
– Its tough for Flash to interact with the rest of the page. Things don’t lay over it well, we can’t script it easily.
Who wrote the ECMAScript 4 spec?
– Adobe, Mozilla, Yahoo and Microsoft. The first to support it, the later two oppose it.
– Probably a better question for Brendon Eich.
If I misrepresented your opinion or misspelled your name please comment away.4 comments