Syd Logan wrote:
> ...
> I think it would be cool if Mozilla 1.0 were a set of technologies (XPCOM, JS,
> XUL, a layout engine, etc.), with well defined interfaces, that stand on their own
> as (binary) components, that can be used to build software such as a browser. And
> not just browsers, but anything that can make use of the technologies that
> mozilla.org makes available.
> ...
I get the feeling that when we mention the 1.0 criterion we are normally
talking about two things, that we should try to distinguish.
The first would be the Mozilla 'project' (or 'projects', or instead
maybe another name for a parent project) which would be best to have
technological requirements - say to support for already decided versions
of standards: HTML, CSS, JS, MathML, POP3, IMAP, etc. These should be
*bug-free* implementations of the standards that we say are part of
Mozilla 1.0.
The second would be the Mozilla Browser - I think also called SeaMonkey
(or maybe it needs another name for the project encompassing SeaMonkey,
the Editor, and Mail/News). This being a browser should be oriented to
the users, and therefore have requirements similar to those mentioned by
Randall Parker in the first e-mail.
When talking about Mozilla 0.9.2, I think we are talking about only the
browser. The other standards maybe further off to 1.0 (depending on the
bug counts).
Vineet
--
--------------------------------------------------->
Vineet Sinha ------------>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------->
UW Comp. Eng. Class of 2001 -------->
