« Google Wave Protocol coming to the Eclipse Comunication Framework | Main | ECMAScript 5 is official »


Nathan T. Freeman

Dan, haven't even read the whole article, but just read the quote on the left side. Can't believe I've never seen it before. Priceless.

Nathan T. Freeman

So wait... I get that you're identifying a rich history behind the style of Javascript that's available in Xpages. But I'm not getting that you have an alternative name proposed. Clearly we can't just call it "Javascript" because that's already a heavily loaded term.

Are you saying XPDJS (Expeditor Javascript)? Or am I missing something?

Either way, yes, some Javascript-related syntax compiled into Java bytecode and then run in whatever JVM context it CAN be, is a very obvious and powerful path to the future. Hopefully, instead of "Lotusscripting the Javascript", we'll see a "Javascripting of Lotusscript."

That would make me one happy camper, I assure you.

Dan Sickles

Nathan, going the history route is a long way of saying: server, client, JVM or native, it's all just Javascript. So I agree, let's call it what it is. The only problem I have with "SSJS" is that it's being used to reference the XPages Javascript implementation. No big deal. I care much more about keeping that implementation current.

The comments to this entry are closed.