Re: Barriers to an ASP loophole closure
> On Tue, 2003-03-11 at 11:58, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> > When I say you're a user of router software, I'm not pushing the
> > definition of user any further than you are when you say I'm a user of
> > PHP-nuke or Apache.
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, David Turner wrote:
> Here, I think Apache is closer to router software than to PHPNuke.
Wow. I'd say almost exactly the opposite. Especially where apache is
actually generating pages (via apache-licensed CGI, modules, or directory
listings). A router does nothing to the data transmitted (ignore NAT
routers and QoS/TTL info for now), but both PHPNuke and Apache make data
available in a more usable format. As do groff and lpr, IMO.
> PHPNuke is distinguishable because it's not designed to do some standard
> thing -- instead, users choose to visit PHPNuke sites in part because
> of their specific, unique features. As an example, I read Luke Francl's
> blog more than I read Teresa Nielsen-Hayden's. Why? Because Luke
> Francl users software which supports RSS output, so I can get it
> syndicated.
Huh? How is implementing RSS any different than implementing HTTP?
> On the other hand, what web server someone uses affects my usage of the
> site not at all.
I have trouble understanding how you can say this. Are you not less
likely to visit a site that doesn't support HTTP than you are to visit one
that doesn't support RSS.
--
Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>
Reply to: