----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry Vennik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The exact point is that when using XUL, we won't have to create the > engine, > which would save us a lot of work. Correct. > Also I think that the bindings for other > languages than JS (specifically Python) may make XUL suitable for aMSN2. > But > I still hate the 'not really native' widgets. You will never be able to get a skinnable interface using native toolkits. I think XUL is the best you can get in this sense. See SongBird http://www.songbirdnest.com/ (yes, XUL based ! :) ) I think it's quite cool IMO, I wouldn't really care about native widgets, if they (even if a little alien) look cool. See WinAmp (forget the prefs control panels). It's all skinned (xml based, too, but win only ;)), the menus are skinned, so alien, but it is still nice at the eyes. The point is (wether you choose XUL or not) if you don't like it to fake the interface you get (because it's too fake or whatever) just make it look completely odd. At least it won't look like like a failed attempt ;) bye ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Amsn-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel
