Apologies for not responding sooner, I have been under a heavy workload. Please do not take my silence as approval of your abuse of the XUL trademark.
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Gerald Bauer wrote: > > PS: For the Mozilla XUL junkie crowd check out Wesner Moise's blog > story titled "Markup-based UI" online @ > http://wesnerm.blogs.com/net_undocumented/2003/10/markupbased_ui.html > Is that how you want to get treated? I fail to see the problem with the above post. Note that the author of that post, unlike you, is not misusing the XUL trademark. He is correctly using it to only refer to the XUL language, as developed by Mozilla. You are still using the term XUL. Please cease using this trademark in this incorrect fashion. On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Gerald Bauer wrote: > > [The] Luxor XUL toolkit sports "auto-mapping" from tags to Java > objects for more than a year now. Calling this product a XUL processor or XUL toolkit is highly misleading as it does not in any way support the XUL language. False advertising of this nature is damaging to our users. Once again, I ask you to please stop misusing the term in this manner. On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Gerald Bauer wrote: >> >> The generic term for XML-based User Interface Languages would be >> XUILs. > > Why not XUI or XMLUI? Why not indeed. Those, or XUML (XML UI Markup Language), or any number of other non-infringing terms would be fine. The problem is merely with your confusing use of the trademark "XUL" to mean "all languages similar to the XUL language developed by Mozilla". (As I have mentioned several times, the "X" part is a rather odd thing for you to focus on. Why are you only interested in XML languages for declarative UI, instead of any language?) Please do not use the XUL trademark in this unauthorized fashion. > For some more insight check out the latest Web > Standard Project story titled "Gooey Standards" online > @ > http://webstandards.org/buzz/archive/2003_10.html#000239 > > Why not count the usage of XUL and report back? This article is a perfect example of the horrendous confusion you are foisting upon the world. That author of that article clearly believes that your product implements XUL, when in fact it does nothing of the sort. With such strong evidence of the confusion you are causing, I must once against request that you stop using the term XUL, and instead use a less confusing term for your sites and products. I also note with interest that you have still failed to answer any of the e-mails I have previously mentioned [1], in which I have asked what I believe to be sensible questions about your position. -- Footnotes -- [1] Here's the current list of e-mails I've sent to this list with specific questions and arguments that you have ignored: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5092944 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5100336 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5142008 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5148075 [2] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=6366592 [2] clarified by http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=5148252 -- 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
