Hi, I wanted to comment your blogpost, but could not register. Anyway.
> http://commadot.com/?p=581 > > I would love your thoughts on it. I don't understand, why people think that this idea is so great, but i'm not 100% shure if I have really understood it. Do you whant to use a HTML rendering engine inside flash or do you whant to use a HTML rendering plugin? I case you whant to use a HTML renderer in flash. Why? You can use flash for any rendering stuff if you need exact virusal reproduction. What do you gain when you give HTML to the flash film? In case you'd like a HTML plugin. Why? People won't install it, because basically their browser does HTML rendering for them. And they don't care about standards, otherwise noone would ever have used Netscape 2 or Internet Explorer 6. I understand you whant a single rendering engine to make shure that your HTML/CSS code always looks the same. I don't. 1. The web has never been designed to give you exactly the same results everywhere. It has been designed to give the user the best possible access to the information independent from his eventual disabilities. Use the tool as it is and don't complain that your hammer is not a saw. 2. If you still need exact visual reproduction of something, there is always flash. You can not have accessability and exact visual reproduction at the same time as much as you never can exactly measure position and momentum at the same time. 3. We have had a browser engine to rule them all, IE, but noone ever liked it. You just change the dictator but stay in domination. Having multiple browser engines gives the users back their freedom of choice. For web developers an designers it sometimes is a pita, but in the whole it is better to have a pita for some and freedom or all. Christof
