Mozilla Wins XUL Motor of the Year 2003 Award

Saturday January 3rd, 2004

Gerald Bauer writes: "The Richmond Post — a news blog chronicling the XUL Revolution — announced the winners of the XUL Motor of the Year 2003 award today [Friday]. Mozilla leads the pack with 98 votes (31%) followed by two Java XUL motors (Swix and Thinlet) and a Flash XUL motor (Zulu)."

Given that Mozilla is the only "XUL motor" on the award shortlist to actually support the XUL specification, it is hard to see how anything else could have won. Unless of course you use 'XUL' to mean any XML-based declaritive markup language, in which case you probably also use 'Java' to refer to any object-oriented programming language and 'English' to describe any language that uses the Latin alphabet.

#37 Re: He should be an example!

by ndeakin

Monday January 5th, 2004 8:43 PM

You are replying to this message

> The Open XUL Alliance is the first initiative to help to promote cooperation and interopability as a first step to create a rich internet for everyone.

It is? The Open XUL Alliance web site makes no mention of this.

So you want it to be the w3c of XUL? It takes a lot of work and more credibility before people will consider that to be possible. A specification is really just a formal version of the documentation. Very few companies or groups actually create formal specs. Instead, specifications are usually made by recognized 'standards organizations', or groups of companies/organizations, when a need arises. If you'd like a specification made, you shouldn't be demanding one vendor such as the Mozilla Foundation to create it. You would need to create it yourself (probably years of work), or promote it to an existing group. The Ian Hickson quotes you link to suggest that might be in process. Indeed, a 'standard' XUL specification would be useful, although a lot of work, and would need to vary highly among different types of situations (such as small devices). I'm not sure why the Mozilla Foundation would want to invest all the work to create a XUL spec to allow other implementations of XUL to exist, thus dimishing the usefulness of Mozilla overall. This may be better for your ideal -- yet unattainable -- world where everyone works together to "create a rich internet for everyone", but this doesn't particularly benifit Mozilla.

/ Neil