| Newsgroups |
gmane.comp.java.luxor-xul.user |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
I would love to have this discussion, as I think you make a valid point,
but I'll defer to Gerald, as I don't want to start a flame war.
Blake
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Sam Terrell [email protected]
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 17:22:02 -0400
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [luxor-xul-user] Benefits of XUL with custom components
Blake Williams wrote:
> Mozilla xul uses xbl to create or extend components. This allows new
> tags to be defined and added dynamically without a change to the layout
> engine. The new tags are "attached" to a document through a stylesheet
> so the layout engine knows where to find the component definition. I
> understand there is a difference between mozilla xul and a java
> implementation as far as how the layout is done, but if the idea is to
> have a java implementation of xul, then it should stick to the standard
> as much as possible. My $.02.
>
> Blake
>
Isn't XBL what your average DTD references?
My problem is that it would be about the same as manually editing the
DTD. Why not just make a special object tag for that?
For instance, lets say I create a new Component that was an extension of
another. Lets call it PhoneField in package net.sf.something.
<object class="net.sf.something.PhoneField" name="phone1">
<set name="color" value="red"/>
</object>
That way we can have setters to set properties on the object as well
without the messiness of creating multiple objects and regestering them
manually for use with componentRef. This will let those wakey people
that are good at making UI's make the UI, and the rest of us just bridge
it to the logic.
Of course, I think this would require some reflection, but I hear that's
not so bad.
The only reason I think this is better other than having a static DTD is
just the right thing to do, is that editors that verify, and parsers
that verify, will really freak out if you use tags that aren't in the
DTD. Editing the DTD for someone else's spec just seems very wrong to
me, especially when you could just make a generic tag instead.
-Sam
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01
_______________________________________________
luxor-xul-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luxor-xul-user
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100006ave/direct;at.asp_061203_01/01