Lists Home |
Date Index |
"OZ never did give nothing to the Tin Man." - America
They already owned their platform. At least
they are enabling an XML language that might
be useful. From an MSThrall's perspective,
and that is what this is, and from the guy
who had to make the decision to turn the
MID into a tag set that duplicated the windows
GUI environment a long time ago, there is a
lot here for me to like. I admit that part
of that, as when I saw XUL, is a certain
When Yuri Rubinsky looked at me in that
restaurant over breakfast nine years ago and
said, "No one will implement MID, Len. HTML wins.",
I realized just how deep the 'we must sell'
mentality pervaded even the most hardcore
SGMLers and that some hard work by some serious
people was going to be thrown away to enable
devolution then evolution. Only Money Matters. :-(
Others suffer that fate. Many in the AI community
look at the Semantic Web and want to throw up,
but just like we did, they will simply repeat
a cycle in their careers. Now that the same ideas are
surfacing on the dominant client platform,
I take satisfaction if no profit. Ontogeny
replicates phylogeny and this is just an
idea who's time has finally come.
HTML and the others won't go away. Even though
the web community is older, this stuff is still
too hard and too expensive for building web pages.
It just enables applications to use the web plumbing
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
email@example.com (Bullard, Claude L (Len)) writes:
>Why is it a good thing if the XULies do it and
>a bad thing if MS does it? Neither invented it
>so the "copied XUL" arguments are horsefeathers.
I'm more annoyed about the copied XHTML+SVG+XForms+whatever else you'd
like to put in the stew. XUL is the least of it to me. The part that
matters is that they appear to be reinventing for the sole reason of
making it theirs, proprietary, kicking out the NIH.
The goalposts have been high before. None of that's new. All that I
see changing here is ownership.