Re: Re: Re: Have you looked at UIML?
Robin Becker <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.anygui.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
In article <[email protected]>, Gerald Bauer <[email protected]> writes >> ....isn't XUL mozilla based? If so it would be hard >> to claim that it's a >> standard. If IE were pushing XUL that would be a >> more reasonable claim, >> but I'd just hate it :) > > No, XUL is like HTML and Mozilla is just one of many >XUL browsers/toolkits. Luxor is another XUL >browser/toolkit and so on. > I searched in vain at w3c.org, perhaps I missed the right question. all I can find are references to why we should use XForms instead of XUL. HTML has the advantage of being standardised by W3C whereas XUL isn't. I'm not against serialising the definitional part of an application, but I doubt anything will sway his Billness from the way of the NET even if the fishes fight back. So I get the complexity of a format which I have trouble editing with ed and I also need a 2Mb widget set plus java and the back end python; the widget set better be pretty good and have some really good tools to go with it. There are many widget sets, but only one XUL might be a good slogan. What we need are the XUL --> Widget set mappings for more than one or two widget sets. Where are the bindings? -- Robin Becker ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old cell phone? Get a new here for FREE! https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390