Comments on: Jon Udell: Rewriting the Enriched Web

By: Mary Jo Foley

Mary Jo Foley — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:55:42 +0000

Interesting. I wonder if “Springfield” — Microsoft’s pending mash-up tool (which I think was formerly code-named “Tuscany”) will serve as the GreaseMonkey equivalent.

Here’s what I wrote about Springfield recently.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=393

By: John Dowdell

John Dowdell — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:29:30 +0000

Groovy, I had a bunch of clicked browsertabs open but not that one, thanks Ryan.

… hmm, but I’ve read that page before, and it doesn’t explicitly connect with Greasemonkey-style user-initiated modifications. The combo seems logical, but did Jon have a proof-of-concept in among the other links on those pages there…?

(The balance between author control and user control has always been a contentious one, so such a difference could be a valuable criterion when comparing technologies.)

tx, jd/adobe

By: Ryan Stewart

Ryan Stewart — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:13:20 +0000

Source citation? I’m not sure he had one, but his links are backwards, so you may be looking for this one – http://wpfesdk.members.winisp.net/quickstart/scripting-frames.html#dynamicallycreating

Because you can create XAML objects right from JavaScript, so the Greasemonkey idea seems accurate.

By: John Dowdell

John Dowdell — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 01:08:22 +0000

I tried to read him, but couldn’t find the source citation for someone’s browser rewriting the XAML they receive.

Do you know where that link is? Where’d that line come from…?

tx, jd/adobe