From: "Zachary P. Landau" <kapheine@...>
Date: 2003-11-01T01:05:58+09:00
Subject: Re: [Q] Ruby and XUL?



On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 12:15:47AM +0900, Michael C. Libby wrote:
> But that's not really a big deal. What I find less exciting about=20
> GLADE/libglade is that the XML is big and ugly compared to the amount of=
=20
> information contained therein (for instance, Mutoh's simple editor exampl=
e=20
> at ruby-GNOME2: the XML for his GUI is 824 lines long, but only describes=
=20
> one small application with three menus, ~20 menu items, one toolbar, a=20
> text buffer, and a status bar-- his Ruby script to support the GUI is onl=
y=20
> 279 lines long and includes some very nice undo/redo and find/replace=20
> functionality). I want an XML/GUI language that I can read and write=20
> without a tool like GLADE. I certainly don't want to wade through 800+=20
> lines of XML to edit a very small application.

Probably the bigger problem with libglade XML is that it is for GTK
specifically. It references GTK widget names and attributes, and uses
GTK layouts. It'd take a lot of weird converting to get it to be more
universal.

--=20
Zachary P. Landau <kapheine@hypa.net>
GPG: gpg --recv-key 0x24E5AD99 | http://kapheine.hypa.net/kapheine.asc



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/oohTCwWyMCTlrZkRAqt8AJ9rDI/EkNXtHU3ODsEcoVqsTdHDBgCeM3Wg
hZ4jPhqceiApeGAXrgXQtCY=
=a1qR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----