snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister questions the wisdom of standardizing on a single language in the wake of the ECMA Committee's decision to abandon ECMAScript 4 in favor of the much less ambitious ECMAScript 3.1, stunting the future of JavaScript. Had the work continued, McAllister argues, it could have ushered in an era of large-scale application development that would ensure the browser's ability to meet our evolving needs in the years ahead. 'The more I hear about the ongoing efforts to revise the leading Web standards, the less convinced I am that we're approaching Web-based applications the right way,' McAllister writes. 'If anything, the more we talk about building large-scale Web applications, the more we should recognize that a single style of programming will never suit every job.' McAllister's simple truth: JavaScript will never be good for everything — especially as the Web continues to evolve beyond its original vision. His solution? 'Rather than shoehorning more and more functionality into the browser itself, maybe it's time we separated the UI from the underlying client-side logic. Let the browser handle the View. Let the Controller exist somewhere else, independent of the presentation layer.'"
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
</img>


More...

Yes, it was... or, do not nearly ALL of the modern javascript (or javascript + iframes based attacks) attacks via bogus HTML mails &/or browser exploits using the mechanics thereof I noted, evidence this, the past 2-3 yrs. now?

If anyone's curious, I actually have an ENTIRE ARCHIVE of those, from the past 3-4 yrs.++ now...

(Nearly ALL pure javascript &/or javascript + iframes exploits on bogus sites, bad adbanners, rotten emails & more)

For those proofs? Hey... just ask.

APK