World: r3wp

how about a simple flag, like a checkforupdates="true" attribute 
or something.  Every other operation, including the sort of actions 
that are necessary to install update is handled through normal security 
requestors.  ... yeah, like Brian said :)

At least that is the case with anonymous applets. Signed applets 
may be able to do more, as signed REBOL scripts should be able to 
do as well.

Reichart - it is exactly as Henrik said - I just meant "real life 
apps", while you mentioned mostly media stuff, which is imo not Rebol's 
target and imo never will be, unless we would get some rebol authoring 
IDE, which I don't see coming in a year or two ahead ....

so all the point was that Flash does not necessarily mean Rebol is 
in the same league. But it was my non-knowledge - I did not know 
they can change menu, thanks for enlightenment, I thought the menu 
is the same because it (the plug-in)  is only a player .... I would 
vote for context menu, but in rebol, what is menu, right? We don't 
use native OS widgets, so just how to do it ....

I am not sure I am for requestor, because if more than one setting 
is needed, then you end up with more than one, popping-up when you 
don't need-it .... such automatism should be configurable ...

there is other possible way - Java adds icon to control panel .... 
that could be good option, not to limit UI of plug-in itself. So 
then, from such icon, we could have dialog with tabs, with various 
settings, could be reblet too .... IIRC Java even installs to Start/Apps 
....

as for browser preference, for me it is IE, FF, Opera, other ...., 
I can see Opera dominating embedded space (PDAs, cell-phones), but 
maybe it is because penetration of OS-X here is nearly non-existant 
... but as someone pointed out - whole world except MS uses Netscape 
API plug-in and even for IE, you can develop ActiveX, which wraps 
the same plug-in, so maybe RT would not have to develop separate 
versions .... otoh we are talking wrappers only anyway, the main 
part is View in .dll form ...

At Etech, the leding conference on new technology, about half of 
the attendees were on Mac....

Whilst Mac is gaining in popularity with developers and may be re-gaining 
ground in the consumer market, it is still nowhere in the corporate 
world where it's still wall-to-wall windows.

..and "locked down" windows at that .... no user installs ... they'd 
 even disable browser plugins if they could

Yes, wall to wall windows, but Mac represents x2 to x4 in sales at 
thier %.

In other words, while they are about 2.5% world wide (4-7% in US), 
of personal system choice, they represent between 7% and 15% of individual 
software sales.

Wow!

I would not want to turn that market down. 

And……………my friends…………….the web is the great equalizer…

hmm, firefox extensions can get an entry in the options dialog, or 
they can be configured from the list of extensions ... haven't found 
anything like it for plugins, though.

Basically you have to target developers ...
Users have to use what developers create.

So, OSX above Opera .. if it makes any difference to anyone.

developers are the thought leaders

It is likely that most developers use Firefox or Camino rather than 
Safari on OSX (especially if they're into Ajax - Safari isn't known 
for the best JavaScript support at the moment).

However, it is the user's environment that is most important. Developers 
develop for IE because that what their target users have. I suspect 
that the average IE user is unlikely to change to Firefox just to 
use one application. Likewise the average Safari user .

Just a quick interjection, but I agree on the installation/interface 
being exactly the same as Flash.   The flash installation is mindless 
(see http://kealist.blogspot.com/) and the plugin should be identical 
to this.   I would have done the same for FF, but I can't get it 
to uninstall.

Yup...

About the settings: I would prefere something like built in side 
(top/left/down/right) bar which can be hidden if user want or still 
visible or even animated, where can be info about plugin version, 
configuration buttons or user defined buttons. In this bar there 
can be built in progress bar as well. I'm agains the right click 
context menu as the right click we can use for other user defined 
purposes, for example If I would like to make my own designed right-click 
menu etc.

But the advantage of the system right-click menu is, that can be 
out of Rebol boundaries. So maybe it's still worth to think about 
it. Here is example how it's possible to use user defined context 
menu in Flash: http://box.lebeda.ws/~hmm/rswf/index.php?example=127

I think the inner border idea is a good one Oldes. That will give 
a standard look to rebol plugin instances. I imagine the border can 
have some controls to hide itself, go full-screen etc.

that is one of options I tried to suggest. The trick is imo to make 
it unobtrusive - will it be sliding? How long will you hold mouse-over 
the region to see it?

Anton - very good idea to eventually make it full-screen ....

I would make it also some 5% transparent, black and white design 
.... top bar displaying some basic buttons, date/time and progress 
dialog ... kind of minimalistic aproach ....

... and I dare to repeat the idea for rebol 3.0 - we need rebol native 
windowing, or imo we are in trouble ...

Hi all -- Carl and I are still talking about these versioning issues. 
So we'll have an update on that soon.

Cyphre, I'm taking a look at that mouse event bug now....should get 
an update to you soon.

Ah, Cyphre, I know the problem.

This is an architecture issue with the plugin...we dealt with it 
back in 2004.

REBOL can only function with its own Win32 HWND window that it controls 
completely (due to message loop issues), so, in order to change as 
little as possible within REBOL, we created an invisible proxy window 
that REBOL controls. When events come into the plugin window, they 
are asynchronously posted to the invisible proxy window, and only 
then make their way into REBOL.

So the delay you're seeing is the delay between the event coming 
into the plugin and being received by REBOL, due to the post-message 
delay (it's actually crossing from one thread to another, hence why 
we are using async).

I think we should look at re-designing this for REBOL 3.0.

Re. Mozilla page refresh bug: This is a mysterious one. I'm going 
to have to dig down into the REBOL C code to figure out what is going 
on here. I'll get an update to you all soon on that as well.

Thanks for the update. Sounds like fun ! :)

joshm: this may not be entirely related, but I'd like to see some 
kind of event throttling, because of the very varying mouse position 
sample frequency under different OS'es. too many events slows VID 
down

Josh - have you found out how to do 'do-browser in FF and Opera? 
Today I thought about how to properly "import" proxy settings (use 
what browser uses) - simply to use some JS facility of browser, if 
there is any such function ....

the trouble in our company is (not sure how common it is), that we 
use proxy configuration script, which gets executed by browser, and 
returns according proxy to go thru ....

I'm not sure that such information is possible through the DOM (which 
is where it would come from). wouldn't that be a security hole?

not sure, I am not skilled enough to see that far :-)

I think it would be. DOM only allows access to page related data, 
not anything beyond that. you can, I believe, tell which browser 
you are running through the DOM

Maybe rebol3 can do networking thru the browser? Would be cleaner.

Versioning: I dont see the problem, but i may understand com wrong. 
AFAIK a single file can implement multiple interfaces. So you dont 
have multiple files when the new version implements the interfaces 
for the old rebols.

Volker, to clarify, the problem is not with COM versioning, but rather: 
when to download a new REBOL DLL binary

regarding proxy settings: please post that on the 1.3.3 checklist 
if you want me to take a look at that. if you could provide a sample 
configuration script for testing, that would be great

do-browser in Mozilla: haven't looked at it yet. it would require 
access to both the Javascript interpreter as well as an "evaluate" 
(or execScript) method that would parse and interpret the script.

if anyone knows of such a feature in the Mozilla API, please let 
me know

networking through the browser: you mean initiating HTTP requests 
for everything? that would slow performance waaay down.

As far as web stuff goes, my customers want the "real life" apps. 
 Security needs range from completely disabled to something like 
java's, but being able to save files locally (save-as requestor).