MozillaZine's ChromeZone Now Open!

Monday May 24th, 1999

Steve Morrison, creator of the XULTool, has joined MozillaZine (as some of you may already know). He has been hard at work getting the XULTool working on our site, and we're pleased to announce that the ChromeZone is now online.

Now, with a simple form, you can change the look and feel of Mozilla, and create your own themes! You can also choose from some ready-made themes we have available. You can also send your own themes to ChromeZone for addition to our site.

So, fire up apprunner and head over to the chromeZone.

We got a lot of great entries for our little "name our new chrome area" contest, but in our final vote, "ChromeZone" came out on top. A number of people submitted the name "ChromeZone" or a variation for our contest. Clayton Scott was the first, however, and his prize is a stuffed Mozilla doll from Netscape. I know we didn't promise any prizes for the contest, but we wanted to give something to the winner.

Thanks to everyone for you contributions, and if you have any suggestions for the chromeZone, let us know.

#222 Re:MozillaZine's ChromeZone Now Open!

by XULisDangerous

Saturday May 29th, 1999 8:34 PM

You are replying to this message

You guys missed my point.

If I go to some website, and they use downloadable chrome as part of the web site's "application", how will I support IE users, WebTV, handheld units, Opera, Konqueror and every other browser.

As a web developer, I don't want to have to deal with the extra hassle. I want to write pure HTML4.0, JavaScript, XML, CSS, and DOM, and have it work *everywhere* whether or not people are using Gecko.

You people are presupposing that somehow, Gecko "wins" and has monopolized the market. That people are shipping HTML applications around on CD-ROMs using Gecko. (a pipedream, trying to code up something like MSWord using Gecko/XUL would be ungodly slow and make Java look like C++ on steroids)

Even if it does Gecko dominates, it is just as bad as Microsoft. I don't care if its open-source or not. I care about standards. To me, what matters is that the file format is supported everywhere, and that the market targets this file format when exchanging data.

To me, if hackers keep adding non-standard features to gecko every release, and web sites actually take advantage of them, that this is just as horrible as Microsoft "embracing and extending" and convincing others to use their extensions.

Some of you people don't even understand how XML works. it doesn't matter if XUL is based on XML, CSS layout, and JavaScript. It still depends on non-standard native code support for it to work.

The acid test is if a XUL file loaded into a XML/CSS/DOM/EcmaScript enabled browser will produce "chrome" on a non-Gecko platform that looks and feels the same. The fact is, it won't.

XML isn't magic. Any application specific DTDs like MathML, or XUL, or SVG still require native C/C++ extensions to work.

Open-source Gecko is just as dangerous as closed-source IE, because developers will have a tendency to slap in lots of featuritis without working with the IETF or W3C first, because they will be "too slow" for their tastes.

Netscape did this in the past by introducing TONs of non-standard tags, including TABLEs, BLINK, MULTICOL, LAYER, etc.

Any introduction of new tags, css properties, or non-standard javascript accessible fields is an abomination. It means some hacks will be tempted to use them, which means we are back to square one of having to supprt multiple versions of our websites.