On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Charles Goodwin wrote: > > Ian Hickson wrote: > > The argument is simply that the term "XUL" only means "XUL", as in the > > language used by Mozilla, not any XML User Interface Language (that would > > be "XUIL"). > > You'll have to eat your words on this one Ian: > http://website-beta.mozilla.org/projects/xul/ > > They're own definition is explicitly: > XUL - Xml User-interface Language.
The acronym "XUL" does indeed _stand_ for "Xml User interface Language". But it only refers to Mozilla's language, it's not a generic term. (The acronym is rather convoluted.) This is what I meant when I wrote the above, and is what I have been saying since Gerald started his "project". The generic term for XML-based User Interface Languages would be XUILs. That is, if you want to restrict the concept to XML, which to me seems like a very arbitrary restriction. -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ _______________________________________________ xul-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xul-talk
