Since my last text, a lot of talk has gone into the blogs about the open social layer that Google is trying to implement.

As already pointed, this approach tries to rival with Facebook, by leveraging power and option for the developer, who has not to re-write its widget/app for each social network he intends to target.

But Google's proposal has drawbacks, too. I haven't seem any "license agreement" or something like that. To be truly open, the social layer has to allow social networks to join and feel safe about the environment they're joining. What if Google starts to charge then? What if Google starts to charge developers? Like Google's approach in many of their APIs and open initiatives, there's a lack of transparency that makes me feel a little "F. U. D." about sticking to them. Let's wait the official site on this.

Another thing to note is: everybody is taking this Google initiative as a reaction to Facebook "growth and profit", but it's real? I think Google is constantly and consistently advancing in this direction (open social layer and using social data beyond Orkut and other social web-sites/apps) since sometime now.

-

I'm long wanting and talking about a social-powered internet, where your network (friends, co-workers, etc) matters. And where you can use they knowledge and data to make your life easier, to get your attention focused on what really matters. From anti-SPAM and anti-VIRUS systems to better search results/page rank, the use of social data can make our on-line life easier than never.

-

Bob Sutton (writer of "The No Assrole Rule") talk about Mozilla Foundation and their commercial counterpart, Mozilla Corporation. It's a long but entertaining post about the numbers Mozilla has made. Worth the read but you have to know that actually, too many of this money comes from Google, who pays Mozilla for every search started through Firefox by Google's embedded search box.

-

W3C finally has opened an office here in Brazil, aiming to help Brazilian's internet authorities to develop, promote and implement web standards. I sure hope this comes with some law enforcing the use of web-standards at least at government web-sites - or something like that for commercial web-sites.

As I love web opportunities and freedom, I'm also a web-developer since Netscape and iCQ days. The lack of standardization through user agents is a major drawback for the "web-everything" approach we all love so much.

-

Finally, trying to find some answer to a strange bug in ColdFusion MX 7.0.2 - where cfdocument tag generates a PDF without justifying the text - I ran over a blog post by Andrew Powell complaining about the lack of standardization on CFML (the open-source language besides ColdFusion).

I'm with him: there's need to standardization through CFML implementations and that includes Adobe. People at Adobe has to know that we do not buy ColdFusion on the tags but on the surrounds, ie, the administrator interface, the possibility to extend CF power with other applications such as Flex, LifeCycle, Flash, etc.

The standardization do not need to go with ColdFusion being open source, Adobe can implement advanced functionality that will degrade gracefully in others implementations, at least until they can make something more likely what Adobe ColdFusion does.

-

Talking about standardization, what is happening at Microsoft? SilverLight? (yeah, I know, old news). Come on! There's Flash out there for so many time, you really believe people will change? You're nuts. And you think we, web-developers, are learning machines of some kind and we do not need to sleep, eat, have sex, etc.

Go with what is already a standard - as everybody does with Windows - and stick with Adobe Flash.

Related Links

W3C opens office in Brazil (in portuguese)

Google open social layer official web-site (still not on-line while I'm writing this one)

Labels: adobe, cfml, choice, coldfusion, google, high-tech, internet business, microsoft, respect, simplicity

« Back to Tecnologia | | Create a Link | Leave a comment »

---

Links to this text:

---