Why is Konfabulator 'Pretty?'

[MisterX]

Marielle, Bill and Tom ;)

I've been studying XUL and while it's a great concept, remember that it's
limited to the mozilla engine. There's been recent discussions on Slashdot
about the disadvantages of Ajax and not the last of them but even MS is
throwing it's copycat cloners into XAML - their version of XUL.

Meanwhile, exchanging GUIs in rev couldn't be simpler than copy paste this
or that group across any apps.

Another issue with Rev and XUL is the handling of CSS and "tables in
html". I know, there is AltBrowser but for processing it has some
limitations i've been told.

Then there's the more serious problem of transfering html compatible
patterns to rev on OSX which is bound to fail miserably - Example being
that i made some OSX specific skins in W2K to port easier my stacks to OSX
later and when i realized my mistake it was too late - damage was done -
20X20 patterns dont work either on macs (they must be specific sizes which
are just horribly restrictive). This is what i think is really limiting
rev in terms of color cursors, and greater integration with the real world
out there - xul included...

While Rev handles XP guis, it's far far far away from being truly
integrated though... Changing hilite colors in windows is not reflected in
Rev until you restart the rev session. And worse, it's not handled as
smoothly as in other apps in windows.

So im sure there will be a solution on day, but it's far from easy today
to handle apps the modern way in Rev...

Just my 2 cents after lots of aggravation trying to get this far with
skins and porting "graphical" applications from W2K to XP to OSX... It's
definitely not as simple or smooth as Chipp says
IMOHO - no offence Chipp...

cheers
Xavier

Marielle Lange said:
> Bill and Tom,
>
> You may be interested to know that I have started doing something
> vaguely along these lines in revolution. Rather than the konfab
> approach, I have taken the mozilla one (konfab is a thing of the
> past, the *new* thing is mozilla ;-) ). XUL is an xml specification
> to define interface components. XBL or eXtensible Binding Language
> allows you to attach behaviors to XUL's XML elements.
>
> Used Together, you can define interface components that are
> interchangeable between applications and even interchangeable between
> different programming environments.
>
> I will post more information soon (demo included). Hopefully next week.
>
>> Yes, Tom, thanks for asking about this.
>>
>> A K. distribution is very simple:
>>
>> - a .widget file, which is exactly a .zip file,
>>
>> containing:
>>
>> - a folder of resources (images, sounds)
>> - a .kon file, which is an XML file encapsulating attributes for
>> the objects
>> and JavaScript.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> Marielle Lange (PhD),  Psycholinguist
>
> Alternative emails: mlange at blueyonder.co.uk, M.Lange at ed.ac.uk
> Homepage
> http://homepages.lexicall.org/mlange/
> Easy access to lexical databases                    http://lexicall.org
> Supporting Education Technologists              http://
> revolution.lexicall.org/wiki