Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XUL and Java - Back to the Future
 To remphasize a point you apparently skipped before, I wrote: >Three-letter acronyms cause enough confusion without deliberate >blurring. Picking another acronym would take the violence and >confusion out of this conversation. I'm annoyed that you're going through things I've written to pick out bits that you think support your points while ignoring that I think you've made a fundamental tactical mistake by appropriating the XUL acronym to your own purposes. luxorxul@y... (Gerald Bauer) writes: >Hi, > >> >Has anyone taken a close look at Mozilla's XUL (XML >> >User Interface Language) and considered using it >> for >> >projects outside of Mozilla? >> > >> >I'd be interested in hearing what folks think about >> >XUL in general, and thoughts about its use outside >> >Mozilla in particular. >> >> I don't think what you're offering answers that very >> old question. > > Then be so kind and tell us what you're looking for? >Or is it that you don't care anymore? I just wanted to know if XUL - the Mozilla XUL, not some extended sort-of-maybe-XUL - was implemented anywhere outside of Mozilla. >> "Handpicked Mozilla XUL goodies" isn't what I had in >> mind by XUL. > > I guess you didn't get it. If I may clarify: Luxor >is not a subset or clone of Mozilla XUL, instead Luxor >is a cleaned up, "legacy-free" XUL version. Then use a different acronym. > For example, Luxor doesn't support Mozilla's XUL >specific template syntax using <template> tags; >instead Luxor lets you use Apache Velocity, XSL/T or >Jelly. Luxor doesn't force you to use RDF for >datamodels but lets you use XML+XPath, JDBC, >Collections and much more. Luxor sports new tags such >as <datagrid>, <portal>, <portlet>, <choice> and so >on. Then use a different acronym. >> If I ask for XUL, I'm looking for the XUL defined by >> Mozilla, whether or >> not it's in the Mozilla context. > > I guess you haven't grasped the concept of >competition, either. You might wonna study Microsoft >further. Your Microsoft Office 2003 and XML talk >slides are a good start online @ >http://simonstl.com/articles/officeXML Why not >revisit your InfoPath (Microsoft XML Forms) slide @ >http://simonstl.com/articles/officeXML/infopath.html > > If I may quote: > ><quote> >Reinventing XForms. Microsoft has fairly consistently >denied any competition between InfoPath and the W3C's >XForms work in profess, but both are definitely >working on the same problem set with some different >approaches and features. ><quote> > >and > ><quote> >Proprietary built on Common. The guts of InfoPath are >familiar JavaScript, XML, and CSS, but they're >extended and integrated with a new set of tools that >isn't publicly available or specified cooperatively. ></quote> > > See the connection. You may see a connection. All I see is quotes you've taken out of context. XForms strikes me as specified cooperatively already, so I'm not sure why you think I'd support yet-another-reinvention. >For XUL to move foward it needs >to break free from Mozilla and as you say "specified >cooperatively". If you want to specify a XUL-like concoction cooperatively, you might want to gather the players. That'd be a lot easier, once again, if you used a different acronym. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com -- http://monasticxml.org 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
