GodlessAstronomer
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2007
- 17,009
- 1
- 0
I think that's a good, technology-agnostic definition TruePaige. I don't see a problem with retaining a dependency on HTTP in the definition (URI) because it's essentially the bedrock of the web. HTML isn't. Already we consume a ton of non-HTML content through XML, JSON and unstructured data, not to mention video and audio content, and this is delivered with non-HTML methods such as Javascript, Flash and Silverlight. Predicating the definition of a browser on HTML is silly and arbitrary.