XBL Submission to the W3C
Friday February 23rd, 2001
Ian Hickson writes:
#1 XBL Rocks!
Friday February 23rd, 2001 9:50 PM
I love XBL. I am going to create my own widget set for Jabberzilla using it.
<http://mozdev.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=167> if you are interested in what I am planning. Some of this stuff I already have working.
XBL allows another level of componentization that really makes things easy in implementing Mozilla applications.
#2 Re: XBL Rocks!
Friday February 23rd, 2001 10:11 PM
<http://xiowa.com/jabberzilla/screenshot.png> is a screenshot of <roster/> working.
Both the rosters update simultaneously via the Jabber component. Way cool.
#3 AOL written all over it :(
Saturday February 24th, 2001 7:14 PM
Actually (and unfortunately) the w3 page says that the submission is from AOL iirc.
#4 Re: AOL written all over it :(
Saturday February 24th, 2001 7:15 PM
Quote from the page:
"W3C is pleased to receive the XBL submission ("XML Binding Language 1.0") from America Online, Inc."
Man that sucks!
#5 Read it again....
Saturday February 24th, 2001 7:24 PM
"The submission was developed through mozilla.org. The document is being submitted to the W3C by America Online, Inc on behalf of itself and mozilla.org."
Mozilla.org is not a member of the w3c, so they asked for AOL to submit it on it's behalf. Please don't post flamebait.
#6 Re: Read it again....
by gerbilpower <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sunday February 25th, 2001 12:26 AM
Also to add that the XBL specification page has David Hyatt's name on it, who I'm sure some of you are familiar with his contributions as a mozilla.org developer, and there's a copyright for mozilla.org there too.
#13 Re: AOL written all over it :(
by erik <email@example.com>
Tuesday February 27th, 2001 11:41 PM
Well, Mozilla is funded by AOL. Without AOL no Mozilla :-(
#15 Re: Re: AOL written all over it :(
Wednesday February 28th, 2001 9:50 PM
Mozilla is funded by anyone willing to pay someone to work on the project or to donate equipment or to work on the project themselves. AOL is one such player in this game but definitely not the only one. There are many engineers paid to work on Mozilla that are employed by companies other than AOL. There are many folks making mozilla better on their own time. There are many groups contributing equipment and other resources to Mozilla.
"Without AOL no Mozilla" is total bullshit. Without AOL slower progress on making Mozilla better, yes, I'd accept that but if you're not the troll you appear to be and you actually believe what you're saying, that without AOL Mozilla ceases to exist, then you're completely out of touch with this project your comments should be ignored. If the more likely case is true, that you're just a troll, then take your bs to slashdot or some other forum.
#16 Re: AOL written all over it :(
by erik <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Thursday March 1st, 2001 10:55 AM
Maybe I did express myself badly. Netscape/AOL released the source. Netscape/AOL are paying most of the engineers working on Mozilla but I think that even if AOL pulled all its fundings for Mozilla it is here to stay. If AOL pulled its funding of Mozilla that would probably be the hardest blow imaginary.
At the bottom of the page <http://www.w3.org/Submission/2001/05/Comment> there is a link to Spice. Has anyone at Mozilla taken a look at it?
Wow... Spice seems a lot more powerful and easier to use than XBL. It just sucks that we will have behaviors, xbl and a w3c format.
This pragmatically means that neither XBL nor Spice move toward the goal of allowing user interfaces to be created by non-programmers.
It seems all the proposals on the table are inadequate.
PS. Did anyone look at the XBL example at <http://www.shadowland.org/xbl/test5/test.html> ? It looks like crap on my Windows 2K system with Netscape 6. Is this even a proof of concept? The interaction capabilities are nice but if you can't deliver a professional appearance, forget it!
#18 Re: Re: Re: Spice
by michaelg <email@example.com>
Thursday March 1st, 2001 5:53 PM
"The interaction capabilities are nice but if you can't deliver a professional appearance, forget it!"
Ahh, did you read that page's title? ("Test #5") Did you note which menu the link to it is under in Mozilla? ("Debug")
It's a test, for debugging. It isn't a 100% polished, all singing, all dancing, killer post-it-note application. It was used to test and debug XBL. It's useful as an example. It isn't useful as an application. How many teach-yourself books give you 100% complete applications with a professional appearance? Not many.
Given that it was constructed using XHTML, ECMAScript and CSS, it *would* be possible to make it look and work as professionally as any web site out there, but why bother for a demo meant for testing and debugging?
Show me. Do it.
I've seen lots of bad dialogs on Mac Mozilla that seemed to have to do with string size differences. This demo seems to have a very similar problem. Can XBL solve that problem or not?
#21 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Spice
by michaelg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sunday March 4th, 2001 10:55 PM
"Show me. Do it."
I really can't be bothered, I'm too busy working on a real XBL aplication..
Cool, how are you dealing with string size differences between platforms?
I guess I'm not. I've never seen the problem, so I don't feel too incliened to deal with it.
Do you mean that you've tested your program on multiple platforms and it has not had a string sizing problem, or do you mean that you haven't seen the problem because you've only tested the program on one platform?
BTW, in case it wasn't clear -- this demo is linked from the W3C XBL submission. I didn't get to it from a Mozilla link. If you can create a professional demonstration, it's bizarre to only link to a substandard one in your formal proposal to a standards board.
It does not appear to me that the comments at <http://www.w3.org/Submission/2001/05/Comment> are positive.
#10 Their alternate ideas seem a bit...
Monday February 26th, 2001 4:07 PM
...shall we say, "lacking"?
#11 Re: comments not positive
Monday February 26th, 2001 5:28 PM
I looked for any reference to "security" on the proposal and couldn't find any. What are the security implications of XBL?