earlier replies
Replying to @mamund
@mamund I guess I find your usage of the acronym confusing. @stilkov @darrel_miller
2
@jon_moore yep. once again, my view of the world seems to be a mismatch. wonder why that is<g>. @stilkov @darrel_miller
1
@mamund Let me ask this then: what insight do we get from considering the browser as a "single pane app"? @stilkov @darrel_miller
4
@jon_moore I see some similarities to the way SPA are architected. @mamund @stilkov
1
@darrel_miller @jon_moore @mamund I can agree, but that only enforces (in my view) that you shouldn’t replicate it. It’s already there.
3
@stilkov that sounds to me like saying "we already designed the perfect home, no need to design another" ;) @darrel_miller @jon_moore
2
@mamund @darrel_miller @jon_moore I don’t consider anything on the web “perfect”. Mostly good enough, though, and not worth working against.
1
@stilkov so change my "perfect home" to "good enough home" and you'd agree w/ my statement? @darrel_miller @jon_moore
1
@mamund @darrel_miller @jon_moore Again, the analogy to a SOAP service hosted at a “URI endpoint” holds perfectly.
1
@stilkov i'll take that as a yes, then. @darrel_miller @jon_moore
1
Replying to @mamund
@mamund @darrel_miller @jon_moore I’ll reverse it: If you turn your native app into an SPA, is it still not on the web?

Jan 12, 2016 · 4:54 PM UTC

1
Replying to @stilkov
@stilkov hahah! now we're getting closer. so, for you, an SPA is "not on the web", right? @darrel_miller @jon_moore
1
@mamund At least not the mainstream SPA. Don’t know about your twisted definition ;-) @darrel_miller @jon_moore
1
more replies