I’ve been skimming through the Adobe AIR for JavaScript Developers pocket book, and toying with the idea of creating the idea of an HTML/JS based application. Looking at the actual code examples kind of put me off though. JavaScript is so primitive - no classes, no typed variables. I remember the hoops you need to jump through to get code organised, and I don’t feel like revisiting them.
Of course, I’m talking about the current standard of JavaScript available in most web browsers, including WebKit, which provides the HTML/JS functionality for AIR. ECMAScript has actually evolved significantly, on paper, but that hasn’t actually reached the browser yet (AS3 is an implementation of ECMAScript 4, or “JavaScript 2.0″ in marketing speak).
It will do soon, however, in the shape of the Tamarin Project, which is due to be launched as part of a new version of the Mozilla project (and presumably, Firefox) later this year.
The question, then, is: why is Adobe on the one hand working with the Mozilla folks to coordinate ECMAScript in both Tamarin and Flash/AIR, and then using WebKit as part of its AIR platform? Wouldn’t it make more sense to go with Gecko, and when Tamarin/Spidermonkey arrives, use that to provide ECMAScript4-compliant languages for both Flash content (ActionScript) and HTML content (JavaScript)? Potentially, that could open the way to building off the AIR API to provide utilities and code libraries that work in both contexts.
I know jack about the technical details, but I think embedding Gecko is REALLY frikin’ hard… or just doesn’t work. Details here:
http://nick.typepad.com/blog/2008/03/can-mozilla-be.html
Nokia had the same issues building their own browser for phones, gave up, and officially sanctioned on WebKit. If it just works, why not? Hey, that phrase sounds familiar…
> Adobe on the one hand working with the Mozilla folks to coordinate ECMAScript in both Tamarin and Flash/AIR, and then using WebKit as part of its AIR platform?
Keep in mind that we didnt just donate Tamarin to Mozilla, we donated it to everyone. i.e. it is an open license that anyone can use… (including webkit)…
mike chambers
mesh@adobe.com
Good point Mike.
Do you see a future with ECMAScript4 for HTML in AIR, then - or do you at least agree it would be a good thing?
Investigating AIR, it was confusing to see webkit,AVM2, tamarin etc. My inference from Mike’s comments is that Webkit does not want to adopt AVM2 into its one stop solution …
So the reading I get is that webkit will be replaced by tamarin in AIR… crooked thinking?
Yes, very crooked :) You’re comparing grapes with grapefruit.
Tamarin cannot replace Webkit; they do different jobs. Webkit is an HTML rendering engine. Tamarin is an ES4 (or as we know it, AS3) interpreter.
My original post is speculative - talking about what may happen in the future. If you just need some basic information regarding AIR, maybe try Adobe’s website.