[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why binding to existing widget toolkits doesn't make any sense

[John A. De Goes]

CSS is purely declarative in nature and entirely deterministic.  
Moreover, it's expressive power is such that you can completely and  
radically alter the look of a website with modifications to CSS alone  
(see Zen Garden). The grammar and semantics are relatively simple and  
can be interpreted and generated by tools, which means that a designer  
can work with CSS files without knowing anything about CSS.

Is it perfect? No. But it's a lot better than trying to encode  
everything in a single language that only a software developer can  
safely work with.

Regards,

John A. De Goes
N-BRAIN, Inc.
The Evolution of Collaboration

http://www.n-brain.net    |    877-376-2724 x 101

On Feb 3, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:49 PM, John A. De Goes <john at n-brain.net>  
> wrote:
> I never said, "CSS", I said "like CSS".
>
> Oh, I missed the "like" word! What do you mean with that? What  
> aspects of CSS do you prefer to? In WPF a "style" is basically just  
> a bunch of attribute key/value pairs.
>
>
> Layout combinators in the spirit of TeX or Lout are more
> flexible while being simpler. In any case, a simple primitive
>
>  grid :: [[Rect a]] -> Rect a
>
> that arranges widgets in a rectangular grid should be enough for GUIs.
>
>
> Spoken like a true programmer who knows nothing about usability. :-)
>
> Yes, layout must be very versatile and user definable.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> John A. De Goes
> N-BRAIN, Inc.
> The Evolution of Collaboration
>
> http://www.n-brain.net    |    877-376-2724 x 101
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20090203/c9abe590/attachment.htm