dotgnu-general
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DotGNU]Re: address@hidden: Re: [Arch]Freenet]


From: Jeremy Petzold
Subject: [DotGNU]Re: address@hidden: Re: [Arch]Freenet]
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 17:33:55 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:0.9.2) Gecko/20010628

David Sugar wrote:

Jeremy Petzold wrote:

I was thinking, how can we leverage our system onto windows?
MS has .NET and will no doubt default to the .NET services in the
desktop if it allows anyothers at all. then it hit me (and we may have
decided this already)
embed our system in Mozilla/Netscape. if we can do this, then perhaps
ISP will have a chance to compeate with MS and AOL may lock Netscape in
as thier Browser so that they may offer the DotGNU services through
their software.

not only will this allow us to compeate with MS on the windows platform,
it will make DotGNU portable to any system that Mozilla is currently on.

what do you all think? am I just being stupid or is this a good Idea?


The idea for a browser plug-in is a good one, but keeping it as part of
Mozilla will limit the possibilites for the client platform.
However, I'm not at all against mozilla having appropriate dotGnu
support and if that's a strategy that we can leverage - all the better. It would also help us funnel support into Mozilla which would be a good
thing, because we need to make Mozilla reach a respectable 1.0 before
this will work. :)

Incidentally, considering netscape 6.x as a launch platform is
strategically flawed.  6.0 has a bad buzz around the net, for good
reason.

        -Barry
_______________________________________________
Arch mailing list
address@hidden
http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/arch

From - Fri Jul 13 13:26:17 2001
X-UIDL: address@hidden
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Return-Path: <address@hidden>
Received: from clmboh1-smtp1.columbus.rr.com ([65.24.0.110])
         by pop-server.twmi.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223
         ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com
         for <address@hidden>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:16:34 -0400
Received: from tarsus.cisto.org (tarsus.cisto.org [151.196.211.15])
        by clmboh1-smtp1.columbus.rr.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id 
f6EHExb22389
        for <address@hidden>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 13:15:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 1169 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 17:21:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO tarsus.cisto.org) (127.0.0.1)
 by 0 with SMTP; 14 Jul 2001 17:21:07 -0000
Delivered-To: address@hidden
Received: (qmail 1072 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2001 17:20:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ns.hightechinfo.com) (209.100.197.99)
 by 0 with SMTP; 14 Jul 2001 17:20:31 -0000
Received: from ron-cf.hightechinfo.com (rondual.hightechinfo.com 
[209.100.197.106])
        by ns.hightechinfo.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA26135
        for <address@hidden>; Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:57:55 -0700
Message-Id: <address@hidden>
X-Sender: address@hidden
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
To: address@hidden
From: Ron Burk <address@hidden>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: [Auth]Project discussion
Sender: address@hidden
Errors-To: address@hidden
X-BeenThere: address@hidden
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.3
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Post: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Subscribe: <http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auth>,
        <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Id: Implementing DotGNU Virtual Identities <auth.dotgnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auth>,
        <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Archive: <http://dotgnu.org/pipermail/auth/>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 10:29:35 -0700

I'm reading posts in this list and thinking there's at
least two or more projects being discussed. The project
I'm really interested in (which may not be what anyone
else is talking about!) goes like this:

a) create a simple/small browser plug-in that manages an
    encrypted local database of personal information
    (no third-party servers for auth whatsoever, use
    the Netscape plug-in API, keep everything really
   simple).

b) create a simple specification for how web servers can
    request personal information from this plug-in using
    existing web standards (might not be much more
    complicated than creating a request in the form
    of an XML file, then referring to that file's URL in
    your web page via an <embed> tag).

c) implement the plug-in for the top browsers, try out the spec
    on some web sites, and then submit the spec to the W3C
I was reading the Mozilla API Docs and it looks like their API would be the best to use as our Plug-in would be suppoerted by NS 4.x, NS 6.x, Mozilla, and Konq.(as it supports netscape plug-ins). then all we need to do is to make a IE plug-in.

What do you you all think?




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]