OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] What's wrong with a XBL, SVG-RCC, XForms combo?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Gerald Bauer wrote:
>>Given technologies such as XBL or SVG's RCC (which
>>would naturally  further integrate things such as 
>>XForms), what advantage do you see in 
>>having a standardised XUL?
>   The point of XUL (XML UI Language) is to keep it
> simple, stupid.

That's a fine approach, but is it compatible with it being standardised? :)

> XUL is here today and it works. The
> only problem is that there are dozens of different XUL
> dialects and varieties.

But isn't that because you can't get more than three people (and even 
that is ambitious) to agree on what's needed in a GUI? The advantage of 
XBL/RCC/whatever-binding-tech-but-there-should-be-only-one is precisely 
that you can allow people to differ, and still to use a common standard 
and common implementations.

Implementing XUL and its variations could be done just as quickly, if 
not quicker, using XBL/RCC/etc. with the bonus of allowing people more 

> You will likely need a year just to figure out
> how build your own simple <button> tag using SVG-RSS,
> XForms and XBL.

Hmmm no. Examples on xml.com, mozilla.org, ibm.com, seem to show that's 
pretty much not the case.

> 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. 

No that's certainly not anywhere near a good description of XBL.

Robin Berjon


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS