Hi Mitch,

>> Sounds like at this point this is water under the bridge, though :)
> 
> For now, at least.
> 
> But, per Alec,  I would like to see the visual appearance of Chandler in
> its current state cleaned up as long as it doesn't introduce material
> delays.

I don't think switching to a different style description language would
provide any visual cleaning in the short term.  Using CSS instead of a
custom style language is more of a platform/interop issue.  If you tell
 a web designer (or a designer familiar with Mozilla) they should do
styling using CSS, it should be easy for them to theme Chandler or their
favorite parcel.

Designers certainly can learn a new language, I think the pool of people
who'll do this is smaller than the pool who would hack at something that
used CSS.

On the other hand, I really don't think Chandler wants to reimplement
XUL, or make CPIA look like DOM.  Many facets of CSS just won't apply to
Chandler, ever.  It's entirely possible a partial implementation of CSS
might be more frustrating to web developers than learning a new style
language!

It's not clear to me how much trying to do a limited amount of styling
using CSS would delay, say, 0.6.  I suspect it would slow things down a
fair bit.  However, this might be one of those things that will slow us
down more the longer we wait to implement it.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to