Re: Proposition for a Gorm feature Was: Gorm too complex

[Helge Hess]

Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> Well,  I had  this  nagging  idea of  another  user interface  textual
> "source" form.   XML could be  good enough for  that, if it's  used to
> define  user interface  in  an abstract  enough  way as  to be  really
> independent from the various  implementations. Ideally, this XML could
> even be used to build interfaces in other frameworks such as GNOME.

You talk about XUL, right ? ;-)

YES !!! Let's make a XUL implementation for GNUstep and MacOSX AppKit. I 
would certainly love it, messing around with IB is nice for RAD, but 
IMHO not for building portable and maintainable applications (ever tried 
to get a useful diff out of .nibs ? ;-).

> Therefore not  in terms  of such  and such class  of OpenStep,  but in
> general terms of Windows, Buttons, Menus, Texts, etc.

Yep, like in XUL. XUL is IMHO not the best language for describing UI, 
but at least documentation for it exists and it's usability is somewhat 
demonstrated by Mozilla.

Greetings
  Helge
--
SKYRIX Software AG     - http://www.skyrix.com
Visit us at CeBIT 2002 - hall 6 / booth H 39/1
German XML-RPC Site    - http://www.xml-rpc.de