Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > After HTML: GUI-ML?

Reply
Thread Tools

After HTML: GUI-ML?

 
 
Next
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Hi folks,

Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
a document, when really it should be the other way around.
And yet, although this seems fairly obvious to me,
having tried myself to write a web browser and given up,
I don't see a lot of movement by major web browser
projects in a direction that might TRULY fix the problem.
I do see a few slow-moving projects: HTML5 and Web Applications.

These are not hobby projects however, and it does seem
that "industry" always has and always will have a
preference for messy, bloated applications and poorly
conceived standards because these things keep people
buying new computers and justify companies' existences.
We as consumers and/or hobbyists however should seek
a better solution, and create it ourselves if necessary!

I would suggest to fix the original problem. Here is my GUIML idea:
GUIML would encode essentially the basic features of a
modern GUI widget system, with enhancements to support
fancier features like animated sprites that you see in some web pages.
But basically it would reverse the fundamental problem with browsers,
namely bad design caused by the code-in-document flaw
that has led to enormous bloat and which has effectively
made many perfectly usable computers obsolete,
because web browsing is a vital app.

I would welcome any support or criticism of this
idea but first take a look below at a sample GUIML web design.
My initial idea is to simply take a familiar GUI like Motif or Java's
GUI
and use that as inspiration.

And, to set things right I would completely remove from HTML
any ability to run Javascript. HTML itself need not even be
supported but could be replaced with any number of
document formats such as RTF or something SGML based.

Imagine the following webpage:

<GUIML>
<head>
<title> Test </title>
</head>
<code>
<!-- insert here javascript code for initialization, callbacks etc
-->
</code>
<design>
<MainWindow> <!-- widget that takes a menu, frame, and scrollbar(s)
-->
<PulldownMenu location=top preferredPointer="hand">
<Menu title=About code="javascript_about()">
</Menu>
<Menu title=Products>
<MenuItem code="javascript_callback1()"> First
</MenuItem>
</Menu>
</PulldownMenu>
<Frame name=main >
<Table width=100% height=100% rows=1 columns=3>
<tr>
<td><PushButton code="js_button_callback()" /> </td>
<td><Image code="js_img_callback()" /> </td>
<td><Document url="foo.html" /> </td>
</tr>
</Table>
</Frame>
<ScrollBar location=right type=vertical callback="js_callback2()" />
</MainWindow>
</design>
</GUIML>

Comments?
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joseph Kesselman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Something like this has been prototyped; look up IBM papers from the
1990's describing the Interactive Transaction System, which was a
styling-rule-driven user interface management system.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
mbstevens
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Next wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
> of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
> arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
> a document, when really it should be the other way around.


There is, in fact, server side javascript. I don't see it
very often -- doesn't seem to have caught on. But from what
you've said this may or may not be what you're really looking
for.

> And yet, although this seems fairly obvious to me,
> having tried myself to write a web browser and given up,
> I don't see a lot of movement by major web browser
> projects in a direction that might TRULY fix the problem.
> I do see a few slow-moving projects: HTML5 and Web Applications.
>
> These are not hobby projects however, and it does seem
> that "industry" always has and always will have a
> preference for messy, bloated applications and poorly
> conceived standards because these things keep people
> buying new computers and justify companies' existences.
> We as consumers and/or hobbyists however should seek
> a better solution, and create it ourselves if necessary!



I can assume, then, that you've left the world of Windows/Mac
behind and have embraced free operating systems?

>
> I would suggest to fix the original problem. Here is my GUIML idea:
> GUIML would encode essentially the basic features of a
> modern GUI widget system, with enhancements to support
> fancier features like animated sprites that you see in some web pages.
> But basically it would reverse the fundamental problem with browsers,
> namely bad design caused by the code-in-document flaw
> that has led to enormous bloat and which has effectively
> made many perfectly usable computers obsolete,
> because web browsing is a vital app.


There is already flash, but it's hard to get standardization on
something like that if you want to support all kinds of
clients on all kinds of machines. Right now there are ways to
use flash and SVG and such in a way that degrades gracefully.


>
> I would welcome any support or criticism of this
> idea but first take a look below at a sample GUIML web design.
> My initial idea is to simply take a familiar GUI like Motif or Java's
> GUI
> and use that as inspiration.
>
> And, to set things right I would completely remove from HTML
> any ability to run Javascript. HTML itself need not even be
> supported but could be replaced with any number of
> document formats such as RTF or something SGML based.
>
> Imagine the following webpage:
>
> <GUIML>
> <head>
> <title> Test </title>
> </head>
> <code>
> <!-- insert here javascript code for initialization, callbacks etc
> -->
> </code>
> <design>
> <MainWindow> <!-- widget that takes a menu, frame, and scrollbar(s)
> -->
> <PulldownMenu location=top preferredPointer="hand">
> <Menu title=About code="javascript_about()">
> </Menu>
> <Menu title=Products>
> <MenuItem code="javascript_callback1()"> First
> </MenuItem>
> </Menu>
> </PulldownMenu>



> <Frame name=main >

UGH! Please don't make the new system require frames.


> <Table width=100% height=100% rows=1 columns=3>
> <tr>
> <td><PushButton code="js_button_callback()" /> </td>
> <td><Image code="js_img_callback()" /> </td>
> <td><Document url="foo.html" /> </td>
> </tr>
> </Table>
> </Frame>
> <ScrollBar location=right type=vertical callback="js_callback2()" />
> </MainWindow>
> </design>
> </GUIML>
>
> Comments?
> (E-Mail Removed)
>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Higson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Next wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
> of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
> arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
> a document, when really it should be the other way around.


How so? You seem to be saying the content should be contained in the
logic...?

> And yet, although this seems fairly obvious to me,
> having tried myself to write a web browser and given up,
> I don't see a lot of movement by major web browser
> projects in a direction that might TRULY fix the problem.
> I do see a few slow-moving projects: HTML5 and Web Applications.
>
> These are not hobby projects however, and it does seem
> that "industry" always has and always will have a
> preference for messy, bloated applications and poorly
> conceived standards because these things keep people
> buying new computers and justify companies' existences.
> We as consumers and/or hobbyists however should seek
> a better solution, and create it ourselves if necessary!
>
> I would suggest to fix the original problem. Here is my GUIML idea:
> GUIML would encode essentially the basic features of a
> modern GUI widget system, with enhancements to support
> fancier features like animated sprites that you see in some web pages.
> But basically it would reverse the fundamental problem with browsers,
> namely bad design caused by the code-in-document flaw
> that has led to enormous bloat and which has effectively
> made many perfectly usable computers obsolete,
> because web browsing is a vital app.


I don't think web browsing requires a very modern PC. A friend of mine still
uses a 800MHz machine from about six years ago with no problems, and I have
a 233Mhz machine that runs Firefox pretty well for most sites. There are
computers older than that still working out there, but not very many, and
there are lightweight browsers such as Dillo (http://www.dillo.org) that
run fine on them.

Despite what Intel tell us, web browsing is one of the things a modern PC
doesn't do much better than an older one.

> I would welcome any support or criticism of this
> idea but first take a look below at a sample GUIML web design.
> My initial idea is to simply take a familiar GUI like Motif or Java's
> GUI
> and use that as inspiration.
>
> And, to set things right I would completely remove from HTML
> any ability to run Javascript. HTML itself need not even be
> supported but could be replaced with any number of
> document formats such as RTF or something SGML based.


I don't think RTF will be popular for the web because it is difficult to
read and generate the code using scripting/templating languages. Besides,
it is set up for display on the printed page.

If you want to make older machines viable, at least base it on XML rather
than old SGML. XML is much simpler (and therefore faster) for the computer
to parse.

> Imagine the following webpage:
>
> <GUIML>
> <head>
> <title> Test </title>
> </head>
> <code>
> <!-- insert here javascript code for initialization, callbacks etc
> -->
> </code>
> <design>
> <MainWindow> <!-- widget that takes a menu, frame, and scrollbar(s)
> -->
> <PulldownMenu location=top preferredPointer="hand">
> <Menu title=About code="javascript_about()">
> </Menu>
> <Menu title=Products>
> <MenuItem code="javascript_callback1()"> First
> </MenuItem>
> </Menu>
> </PulldownMenu>
> <Frame name=main >
> <Table width=100% height=100% rows=1 columns=3>
> <tr>
> <td><PushButton code="js_button_callback()" /> </td>
> <td><Image code="js_img_callback()" /> </td>
> <td><Document url="foo.html" /> </td>
> </tr>
> </Table>


Using a table like this suggests you don't really understand the aims of the
standards you wish to replace.

> </Frame>
> <ScrollBar location=right type=vertical callback="js_callback2()" />
> </MainWindow>
> </design>
> </GUIML>
>
> Comments?
> (E-Mail Removed)


 
Reply With Quote
 
VK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006

Next wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
> of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
> arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
> a document, when really it should be the other way around.


You missed the train This way exists for many years already and
it's called "behaviors". Unfortunately for all these years the only
browser supporting it was IE. But now Firefox got the idea right. OK,
they called it "bindings" and transformed a simple structure into XML
mess - but it is all forgiven for the break through itself

See my post (author "VK") at
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets/browse_frm/thread/10e3360c3458471e>

 
Reply With Quote
 
Toby Inkster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Next wrote:

> GUIML would encode essentially the basic features of a
> modern GUI widget system


Google: XUL.
Google: XAML.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact

 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Underwood
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2006
Next wrote in
(E-Mail Removed) om:

> Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
> of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
> arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
> a document, when really it should be the other way around.
> And yet, although this seems fairly obvious to me,
> having tried myself to write a web browser and given up,
> I don't see a lot of movement by major web browser
> projects in a direction that might TRULY fix the problem.
> I do see a few slow-moving projects: HTML5 and Web Applications.


I think the bigger issue with HTML and browser design is that it only
supplies *hints* and *suggestions* as to the formatting, rather than making
all browsers display a page with identical formatting, as PDF does. It would
be so much easier as the designer of a site if you could be confident that
everyone would see the same view of the page without the line breaks and
table column widths being variable under user control. Let users have a zoom
control (as for Acrobat Reader) it they need larger print but don't let them
change the font size independent of all other objects on the page; let the
site author retain full control over all other aspects of formatting,
typography etc.

This could easily develop into a debate about the philosophy of browers and
the web. I wonder if Tim Berners-Lee and the people that devised HTML would
still have designed it that way that it is in the light of people who are
itching to use it as a tightly-controlled page-format tool.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jose
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2006
> It would
> be so much easier as the designer of a site if you could be confident that
> everyone would see the same view of the page without the line breaks and
> table column widths being variable under user control.


No it wouldn't - don't be ridiculous. I don't give a hoot or a damn
what the web designer thinks I ought to see. The web designer in most
cases is a moron. I came to see the content, and I want to see it -my-
way. The web designer isn't going to buy me a new computer or monitor
to display their wonderous work of art (a luxury dead tree designers do
have), and they are mistaken if they believe that the only thing I am
interested in is their TV show. I am doing things. Often I am doing
things with their site and another program.

It's my goddamn computer!

Hmmph!

> but don't let them
> change the font size independent of all other objects on the page


So if I want to be able to read the text, the picture has to balloon
too? And if I want to shrink the window so I can see my spreadsheet,
the pictures have to become postage stamps??

> let the
> site author retain full control over all other aspects of formatting,
> typography etc.


If you actually want me to =read= your content, let =me= choose the
formatting and typography. Let me turn off all the inane flashing
animations that steal my attention. Let me navigate back and forth at
will, my way.

Do you ever browse the web as a =user=??

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Carolyn Marenger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2006
Martin Underwood wrote:

> Next wrote in
> (E-Mail Removed) om:
>
>> Years ago, it occurred to me that a lot of the trouble
>> of writing web browsers is caused by the upside-down
>> arrangement of things: Javascript code exists inside
>> a document, when really it should be the other way around.
>> And yet, although this seems fairly obvious to me,
>> having tried myself to write a web browser and given up,
>> I don't see a lot of movement by major web browser
>> projects in a direction that might TRULY fix the problem.
>> I do see a few slow-moving projects: HTML5 and Web Applications.

>
> I think the bigger issue with HTML and browser design is that it only
> supplies *hints* and *suggestions* as to the formatting, rather than
> making all browsers display a page with identical formatting, as PDF does.
> It would be so much easier as the designer of a site if you could be
> confident that everyone would see the same view of the page without the
> line breaks and table column widths being variable under user control. Let
> users have a zoom control (as for Acrobat Reader) it they need larger
> print but don't let them change the font size independent of all other
> objects on the page; let the site author retain full control over all
> other aspects of formatting, typography etc.


I was thinking about developing a new hardware device allowing a user to
plug into a free USB port, and having the information appear within the
users neurons. Then, I don't care what screen size they have, i don't even
care if they can see. My page is plunked right inside their brain, and
they get all of the content just the way I want them to.

Yet another layer of sarcasm...

Carolyn
--
Carolyn Marenger

 
Reply With Quote
 
Toby Inkster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2006
Martin Underwood wrote:

> I think the bigger issue with HTML and browser design is that it only
> supplies *hints* and *suggestions* as to the formatting, rather than making
> all browsers display a page with identical formatting, as PDF does.


If you want PDF, then *use* PDF.

> I wonder if Tim Berners-Lee and the people that devised HTML would
> still have designed it that way that it is in the light of people who are
> itching to use it as a tightly-controlled page-format tool.


Yep, I think they would have.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
if instance variable get initialize after assigning some values or after constructor then when does static variable get initialize Tony Morris Java 3 02-04-2006 08:39 AM
.NET server becomes slow after several hours, go back normal after restarting IIS davidw ASP .Net 3 08-27-2004 06:25 PM
After adding Textboxes to calender control, how to get values after Postback? Andreas Klemt ASP .Net 0 02-01-2004 02:54 AM
Datalist selects Item after first click, but does apply the SelectedItemTemplate after the second click only Dirk Meusel ASP .Net 1 08-19-2003 09:56 AM



Advertisments