[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
elharo@metalab.unc.edu (Elliotte Rusty Harold) writes:
>Hmm. To me it looks like XAML is considerably better designed than
>XUL. This is very much like the difference between SVG and XSL-FO
>that I wrote about in Item 11 of Effective XML, Make structure
>explicit through markup. XUL is using a double syntax with embedded
>CSS.
Hmm. I thought Microsoft looked stupid for integrating presentation
information directly with the markup rather than accepting what I see as
a much more manageable CSS-based approach.
Oh well. Guess they weren't going to please everyone anyway, and it's
obvious from their other formats that they've really never had a clue
what to do with CSS, despite it's having been the original
differentiator between IE and Netscape.
|
