[Greasemonkey] Greasemonkey: an Historical Perspective

Aaron Boodman zboogs at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 11:12:23 EDT 2005

L! I knew I shouldn't have replied. Evan once again sums up my
thoughts in two sentences.

On 4/18/05, Evan Martin <evan.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/18/05, Matthew Gertner <matthew at allpeers.com> wrote:
> > Thought this might be of interest to some. I started out writing an essay
> > about how XML has totally failed in its original goal (so far), which was
> > mainly to provide technically sound underpinnings for an extensible web
> > before half-assed HTML-based methods got too much traction. Greasemonkey
> The whole point of Greasemonkey is that you're fixing websites that
> the site owners got wrong in the first place.  The very fact we use
> something like Greasemonkey means these people don't get it already.
> You wish they'd produce XML, and I wish they'd just not produce stupid
> sites.  Which one of those is easier to achieve?
> _______________________________________________
> Greasemonkey mailing list
> Greasemonkey at mozdev.org
> http://mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/greasemonkey

More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list