Security is the browser's responsibility. You cannot blame a language for
insecure implementations of it. (You *can* blame for trying to be too much
like Java whilst discarding type-safety, using a different inheritance model
etc. -- but that is another story.)
I think the html with plug-ins model is so ubiquitous now for presenting
dynamic content that, although it may have flaws, it is much better to use
the standard than to invent a new one (we are not Micro$oft, after all).
Plug-ins will continue to evolve. E users will have much more flexibility
if they have the option to install, for example, the latest flash player
in their background manager. Also, the mechanisms already exist for specifying
content from local or remote locations - great for people with always-online
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 09:17:48 GMT, Richard Martin said:
Why not make the background an html browser which supports plug-ins.
That way backgrounds could be written in plain html, html with
on your *DESKTOP*???