Re: GNUstep roadmap (was Re: [Suggestion] GNUstep-test for qualitycontrol)

[Helge Hess]

On 23.10.2003, at 09:58, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
> on 10/23/03 3:27 AM, Helge Hess at helge.hess@opengroupware.org wrote:
> > There is something else which does exactly that: Mozilla. So a central
> > question is what is better about Rennaisance? Mozilla has a pretty
> > excellent cross platform UI framework.
> I never programmed it, but as a user, I hate it. I was soooo happy when
> someone started prgramming Camino, the geck with the aqua look.

Yes. The major thing which was done wrong in Mozilla is not 
implementing the XUL widgets using the native widgets of the system. 
This is exactly the reason why OPENSTEP/NT was suboptimal and why 
Java/Swing is a mess.
Yet, Mozilla has the technology to back XUL widgets with native widgets 
which is why the technology is actually pretty nice and it only really 
breaks on MacOSX.

> Not just for
> the look (ok, it is just looks like any other apps, has a better UI and
> doesn't focus on themes or such) but also for the usability and speed. 
> I was
> even going to ask the authoer if this thing could be ported to 
> GNUstep. I
> don't know how he handles the gecko engine, if he as wrappers or if he 
> needs
> Obj-C++ stuff.

Well, Camino is IMHO the wrong approach for dealing with the issue. 
Mozilla could do better (and does better on Windows and gtk+!) at the 
very core.

regards,
  Helge
--
OpenGroupware.org
http://www.opengroupware.org/