On Fri, 24 Oct 2003, Gerald Bauer wrote: > > Ian, I don't care about Mozilla XUL.
So I have noticed. Quite amusing for someone who hosts a lost called "xul talk". > The Mozilla XUL "spec" is a dead anyway. It hasn't been updated for > years. I think you are confusing "dead" with "stable". XML hasn't changed in "years" either, does that mean XML is dead? > The XUL Alliance will create a new XUL standard that is no longer bound > to Mozilla and open to all. XUL is not bound to Mozilla (others have implemented it) and is as open as any standard can be (input is welcome from anyone and there are no restrictions on its implementation). You appear to be spreading FUD, much like Microsoft is frequently seen to be doing. Note that XUL has editors who currently work for Apple, Opera, Mozilla Foundation, and others. Despite what you say above, XUL _is_ in active development, we are currently taking feedback into account and are more carefully defining the XUL box model. Incidentally, do you have a time frame on your "new XUL standard"? It doesn't seem to have changed for years, which by your definition would make it "dead". -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: The SF.net Donation Program. Do you like what SourceForge.net is doing for the Open Source Community? Make a contribution, and help us add new features and functionality. Click here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ xul-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xul-talk
