Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 16:26 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 414989
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Appl Store approval process will get worse
by whartung on Tue 23rd Mar 2010 22:31
in reply to "RE[2]: Appl Store approval process will get worse"
Not quite. The rendering etc is done server-side, but there's still a minimal local interpreter because it needs to be able to intercept javascript events and act on them.
I don't know if I'd call that an interpreter per se. I mean, Apple can bend their rules however they want. But associating a region on the screen with a URL, and processing the URL when the screen region is touched, is pretty well stretching it.
There are many apps that go to URLs when you tap something. That's all this would do.
How is that different than touching an picture in iPod and having it flip over to show the song list? Or clicking on an persons name and having the system download pertinent details from the network and displaying them. It's a reaction to an event.
Again, by the thinnest, weakest definition, yes, it's an interpreter, but at this level all applications are interpreters.
Whatever it is, no matter how it's implemented, it's a far cry from any kind of "general purpose" interpreter, that's for sure.
RE[3]: Appl Store approval process will get worse
by dsmogor on Thu 25th Mar 2010 17:43
in reply to "RE[2]: Appl Store approval process will get worse"




Member since:
2008-07-15
Not quite. The rendering etc is done server-side, but there's still a minimal local interpreter because it needs to be able to intercept javascript events and act on them. Even if all it does is forward the event to their server and send back the changed content, that's still enough grounds for Apple to reject as it's possible to run random 3rd party code in a 3rd party app.
Personally, I think Apple's controlling attitude is ridiculous, but the terms are very clear on this point at least. Many of their restrictions are arbitrary, but they seem pretty consistent with the no interpreters rule.