Not exactly. Some frameworks are evolving to
make using the classic HTML browser (ie, HTML
as the host language of a universal intergace)
less necessary. It is much cooler. I also said,
if we want to use the term "web browser", that
term becomes less descriptive of a specific
platform and becomes more a watered down way
to say, "web aware because it can use the
operating system web services without using
a line of HTML".
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Uche Ogbuji [mailto:]
> I have been carefully saying "HTML Browser". A
> client can be web-aware and XML-capable and
> never touch HTML. So we agree. A dedicated
> client may not be browsing; it may be processing
> only that XML that it cares about. My position
> is that, and I did say this, that what we
> call a web browser could change. In that sense,
> any client on the system can be web aware and
> can still be smart.
So when you said "the broswer lost", you meant "the browser evolved"? I know
that's less cool sounding, but saying so up front would have saved us all a
lot of talking past each other.
