JTK wrote:
>
> Stuart Ballard wrote:
> >
> > The chain of decision did not go "How can we make
> > a browser that's skinnable - I know, let's use XML for our user
> > interface". It went "Ooh - since we're using XML for our user interface,
> > we can make it skinnable!".
> >
>
> I don't believe either of those is right, but I'll defer to others more
> intimately involved with the process than I. It is my understanding
> that:
>
> 1. Skinnability was always a top priority. Otherwise, how do you think
> Netscape/AOL was going to get people to work on the project for free,
> yet still 'private-label' it?
> 2. The decision to interpret the GUI was made long after that design
> decision was made.
>
> Are you privy to knowledge that this isn't the case?
Yes, and so are you. Look back at newsgroup postings in this group
(which is never set to expire if you read it on news.mozilla.org) and
the other n.p.m.* groups for the time period around the time that
Netscape 6 Beta 1 was released. Just *after* this, Netscape decided that
skinnability was a major goal for Beta *2*. At this point, Mozilla had
been using an interpreted UI for at least 6 months if not a year or
more.
People outside Netscape had been working on it "for free" for a year
BEFORE it ever had an interpreted UI (lots of people worked on the
"Classic" codebase in the first year of the mozilla project).
The whole design process was done IN PUBLIC. You can go and see FOR
YOURSELF.
But I'm sure you won't, because you'd rather just categorically deny the
truth than go and actually research it...
Stuart.
PS I suppose you'll come up with some conspiracy theory like "Netscape
always wanted to make it skinnable, but they were deciding that in some
private discussions that they didn't publicise until later". But why
would they keep it hidden? They were perfectly capable of providing
skinnability as soon as the interpreted UI was in place, but they
didn't. They waited until beta 1 came out and everyone said "God this is
so ugly" (which everyone on the newsgroups here had been saying for 3
months already) to realize that skinnability had to be a design goal.
This sounds to me like management *incompetence*, not a conspiracy.
