<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: First Flex Prism App</title>
	<atom:link href="http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/</link>
	<description>Merging the best of the web and desktop</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 09:34:25 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: enefekt</title>
		<link>http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/comment-page-1/#comment-48</link>
		<dc:creator>enefekt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 03:48:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/#comment-48</guid>
		<description>I was using Flex/ActionScript and XUL/JavaScript about an even 50/50. Now I&#039;m doing more Flex and ActionScript 3. I think AS3 rocks too.

You can write your own XUL components with XBL, XUL and JavaScript. And of course you can view and use the source on most of them.

And MXML is modeled very closely to XUL, so if you&#039;re good in one, you can whip up an interface in either.

The problem is, is that it seems that Mozilla is putting more of an emphasis on using HTML/CSS/JavaScript for developing user interfaces. For instance, why not promote XUL as a equal with Prism? So the perceived XUL waffling that I see makes me nervous about it&#039;s future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was using Flex/ActionScript and XUL/JavaScript about an even 50/50. Now I&#8217;m doing more Flex and ActionScript 3. I think AS3 rocks too.</p>
<p>You can write your own XUL components with XBL, XUL and JavaScript. And of course you can view and use the source on most of them.</p>
<p>And MXML is modeled very closely to XUL, so if you&#8217;re good in one, you can whip up an interface in either.</p>
<p>The problem is, is that it seems that Mozilla is putting more of an emphasis on using HTML/CSS/JavaScript for developing user interfaces. For instance, why not promote XUL as a equal with Prism? So the perceived XUL waffling that I see makes me nervous about it&#8217;s future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Ortega</title>
		<link>http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Ortega</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:48:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enefekt.com/sansbrowser/2007/10/28/first-flex-prism-app/#comment-47</guid>
		<description>I haven&#039;t tried the XUL language...yet.  I use more ActionScript in my day job as Flex Developer than MXML.  AS3 is (for the most part) a joy to code with.  The thing I find most enjoyable about Flex is that the Flex Framework presents you with a way to program your own components.  Meaning, you can view source on hundreds (I&#039;ve never counted) flex components and see how to make your own.  Does XUL come with that?  If not, then it would take too much time for me to learn XUL on my own.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t tried the XUL language&#8230;yet.  I use more ActionScript in my day job as Flex Developer than MXML.  AS3 is (for the most part) a joy to code with.  The thing I find most enjoyable about Flex is that the Flex Framework presents you with a way to program your own components.  Meaning, you can view source on hundreds (I&#8217;ve never counted) flex components and see how to make your own.  Does XUL come with that?  If not, then it would take too much time for me to learn XUL on my own.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
