[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Matt,
I don't think the concept itself is 'ill-conceived'. I have seen and
built ample evidence of its effectiveness. For example, it takes only a
minute to build GUI around your favorite command line tool; adding help
and parameter validation would add a few more minutes. Another example
is Eclipse plug-ins. While some plug-ins require deep integration with
Eclipse, simple plug-ins can be created using XUL without intimate
knowledge of Eclipse innards.
Use of XUL in Mozilla itself is debateble. Sure there was a lot of GUI
frontends to create, but I think one could have achieved the same with
some readily available tools.
I think Java needs something like XUL but better.
Best,
Don Park
Docuverse
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Gushee [mailto:mgushee@havenrock.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 5:28 PM
> To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] User interface programming XUL?
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 05:12:16PM -0700, Don Park wrote:
> >
> > My opinion of XUL is pretty low at this point. As I
> mentioned before,
> > there is no DTD. XUL is poorly designed and poorly documented. I
> > have
>
> How about 'ill-conceived'? I'm inclined to think that runtime
> GUI construction is simply an inappropriate task for XML. The
> Galeon browser (based on the Mozilla libraries) reportedly
> achieves greatly improved performance over Mozilla, precisely
> because it doesn't use XUL.
>
> --
> Matt Gushee
> Englewood, Colorado, USA
> mgushee@havenrock.com
> http://www.havenrock.com/
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org
> <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS
<http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
