[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Yes. One could argue that XAML is for MS developers and
isn't something necessarily living inside a browser. If
so, it could be seen as an alternative to HTML browsers.
But mainly, it is a means to extend the framework and
provide a declarative means to use the objects one
is writing. For those of us who need to develop objects
for others to script to who may not be code-capable,
this is the way to go. In that sense, this is not a
competitor but clearly, an alternative. Does it overlap
the roles of HTML? Yes.
I don't expect MS to implement SVG any more than I
expect them to implement PDF. Plugins do that so
why put yetAnotherPluginCompany out of business?
"Be careful what you wish for", as they say.
len
From: Gerald Bauer [mailto:luxorxul@yahoo.ca]
It's not a problem. The problem is that Microsoft
denies that XAML is an HTML alternative when it
clearly is.
> The fact of XML means alternatives are possible and
> even desirable to other languages. That is
> evolution.
> For every language I can think of, there are
> alternatives.
>
> Why should everyone buy into the HTML monoculture?
Again the issues is that Microsoft tries to deny the
fact that XAML is not just a new way to wire up .NET
objects but clearly is also an alternative to HTML,
SVG, XSL-FO, and so on.
|
