I think it's about control of distribution channel. I bet a game from EA with downloadable content that contains Lua code will fly without a second guess from Apple's police department as long as you have to buy the downloadable content from Apple's online storefront.  

I have half a mind to restyle the Caesar browser to fit on the iPhone's screen and ship a dirt simple app that embeds it in a WebKit instance. This should meet the requirements of section 3.3.1, as JavaScript above WebKit is supposed to be legal. It would be interesting to see whether or not the app would be rejected. 

On Apr 15, 2010, at 1:23 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:

> On 15.04.2010, at 22:11, Lawson English wrote:
>> 
>> Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>> Not to defend Apple's hubris or anything, but John's other apps written in Squeak are still in the store. Scratch was not taken down because it is implemented in Squeak, but because it downloads code from the internet and runs it.
>>> 
>>> - Bert -
>> 
>> AH, if that is the case, then there is hope.  If you could modify things so that only the official site could supply "content" then perhaps the policy can be circumvented...
> 
> Not really. Apple wants to ensure that the behavior they test is the same as the behavior the users see. So no "active content" download.
> 
> Typical apps do not download code, they are only updated when a new version gets released (and each new version is tested again by Apple).
> 
> In that sense John's other apps are fine, they are just an executable written in a mix of C and Objective-C, plus a fixed datafile we usually call "image".
> 
> - Bert -
> 
> 
>