[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] XUL and Standards
Hi, > I am not against XUL outside of Mozilla at all. I > would love to see many implementations > of XUL. Then stop whinning. Whom do you wait for? Microsoft? Adobe? IBM? Sun? Apple? > But they have to be XUL. Just pick > whatever you feel convenient > ("some mozilla goodies") > doesn't cut it. I guess you haven't grasped to concept of competition yet. Luxor doesn't just pick what feels convenient. Luxor cleans up Mozilla XUL and creates a legacy-free version following the XML footsteps (XML is a cleaned-up version of SGML). If I may quote from the Luxor docs: <quote> Luxor XUL isn't a Mozilla XUL clone and, therefore, welcomes any ideas that make building UIs easier. </quote> > You need to understand what standard means what > conformance can do to a technology. I'm sure you're an expert. Please, educate yourself before dishing out platitudes. May I quote from Clay Shirky's article titled "Interoperability, Not Standards" online @ http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/03/15/clay_interop.html <quote> Because standardization requires a large enough body of existing practice to be worth arguing over, and because P2P engineering is in its early phases, I believe that a focus on standardization creates two particular dangers: risk of premature group definition and damage to meaningful work. Focusing on the more modest goals of interoperability offers a more productive alternative, one that will postpone but improve the eventual standards that do arise. </quote> or how about this <quote> Even if at this point, P2P were a crystal-clear definition --within which it was clear which sub-groups should be adopting standards -- premature standardization risks destroying meaningful work. This is the biggest single risk with premature standardization -- the loss of that critical period of conceptualization and testing that any protocol should undergo before it is declared superior to its competitors. It's tempting to believe that standards are good simply because they are standard, but to have a good standard, you first need a good protocol, and to have a good protocol, you need to test it in real-world conditions. </quote> Still convinced that I'm clueless? - Gerald ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
|
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
|