[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> PS: XBL stands for XML Binding Language and is
> bascially nothing more than a CORBA-like IDL
> (Interface Definition Language) that lets you "plugin"
> your own XUL tags written in C/C++, for example. If
> you use C#, Java, Python or any other modern language
> that supports reflection (that is, built-in runtime
> type information) you don't need the useless XBL
> bloat.
>
This is wrong (except on what xbl stands for). XBL is more like dhtml
behavior in ie or rcc in svg. It essentially allows you to define your
own xul tags and attach behaviors to them (constructors, methods,
properties, event handler, etc.). You can use javascript to implement
your xbl bindings. This even works in remote xul (i.e. your xbl
extensions gets downloaded with your main xul document from a web
server). Unpack your toolkit.jar in your mozilla distribution, you can
see tons of examples of this. The "corba-like IDL" thingy mentioned is
used in xpcom, which you can use in your xbl bindings or NOT.
I totally second the comments that we don't need any more specs. We
have enough spec to do rich internet applications (xul+xbl+svg+rcc). We
only need more and solid implementations of the specs.
|
