RFD: EROS + mozilla GUI
Shawn T. Rutledge
Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:39:40 -0700
On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 09:21:12PM +0700, Constantine Plotnikov wrote:
Whoops, should've read this message before posting...I didn't realize
you were proposing use of Mozilla directly. When I criticized mozilla
I was referring to their writing a bunch of custom widgets, on top of
GTK; they kept all of GTK's bloat, added custom skinning on top, ignored
GTK's theme support, and introduced a lot of bugs to boot. They could
have used XUL regardless of this, and still kept the default widget
implementations provided by GTK.
> Mozilla GUI architecture has three layers.
XUL is too low-level IMO. It can't be used to describe a UI in a
way that will render just as well on a PC or a PalmPilot. But
it's a good point that it must be possible to have some client-
side code, so that not every interaction requires a round-trip to
a Scheme-like language were used, then both appearance and behavior
could be described using the same language.)
> XPCOM may be replaced with capabilites in EROS.
> XPConnect will need to be rewrited to support capabilites
> instead of mozilla components.
These are part of Mozilla, why would you need to replace them?
EROS would just be generating XUL, right? And you'd run Mozilla
> BTW EROS license (GPL) and Mozilla one (MPL) do not look
> as compatible. This issue should be examined. EROS makes
> distinction petween application and application component
> as vauge as possible so GPL license application is somewhat
Again if you don't couple them too tightly, then who cares; surely
the license of the system used to generate the XUL is irrelevant?
_______ Shawn T. Rutledge / KB7PWD firstname.lastname@example.org
(_ | |_) http://www.bigfoot.com/~ecloud email@example.com
__) | | \________________________________________________________________
Get money for spare CPU cycles at http://www.ProcessTree.com/?sponsor=5903