One of the major problems with it is it's lack of "independence" from it's primary application that it is based on - Mozilla. This is natural from a tool that "grew" out of the side of another program.
I don't think there is any problems with having multiple XML based UI toolkits anyway. Diversity is a good thing :-)
Outside of dividing valuable resources and creating confusion, it's probably not a bad thing. I'm not suggesting going with XUL. I think you need to look at the pro's and con's of each and then try and get buy in. If XMLUI is the way to go, wouldn't it be nice to have Mozilla buy in and possibly transition to it, and show it off? Or would it be better to go and address the short commings of XUL and possibly get the help in doing that from some of the Mozilla folk? I'm not knowledgeable enough to say which path is the best, or if there might be a completely different path.
There's more to it than just creating something that can render UI elements from XML stream. To be truly successful you need a UI editor that can generate the XML stream. And creating such an editor is probably less than trivial. So I think it would be better to focus on one goal rather than multiple. I think timing will be more critical now than creating alternatives.
David Bradley
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
