XUL

XUL (/ˈzuːl/ ZOOL), which stands for XML User Interface Language, is a user interface markup language developed by Mozilla. XUL is implemented as an XML dialect, enabling graphical user interfaces to be written in a similar manner to web pages. Such applications must be created using the Mozilla codebase (or a fork of it); the most prominent example is the Firefox web browser.

XUL
ParadigmDeclarative (markup language)
DeveloperMozilla Foundation
Implementation languageC++
PlatformGecko
OSCross-platform
LicenseMPL
Filename extensions.xul
MIME type: application/vnd.mozilla.xul+xml
Websitehttps://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/XUL
Major implementations
Mozilla
Influenced by
HTML, XML

In recent years, Mozilla has been reducing the usage of XUL in Firefox.[1][2] The most notable example is the removal of add-on customization. Firefox originally permitted add-ons to extensively alter its user interface via custom XUL code, but this capability was removed in Firefox 57 and replaced with the less-permissive WebExtensions API.[3][4] Several forks of Firefox, such as Pale Moon,[5] Basilisk,[6] and Waterfox,[7] retain support for XUL add-ons.

History

XUL was devised at Netscape in 1997 as part of the development effort that eventually became the Mozilla codebase.[8] It never gained much traction outside of Mozilla or its forks. In the early 2000s there was some interest in using XUL by other parties, including Amazon,[9] but that dried up with the advent of HTML5.

With the release of Firefox 57 in 2017, Mozilla removed support for legacy add-ons, including the use of custom XUL code.[3][4] This was a key step in the organization's long-term goal of reducing XUL usage in Firefox and replacing it with HTML5 alternatives.[1][2] However, the UXP fork of the codebase maintains the traditional XUL capabilities.[10][11]

Usage

XUL can only be used with the Mozilla codebase (or a fork of it) because the Gecko engine does the XUL rendering.[12]

Application programmers need to define a XUL interface as three discrete sets of components:

  1. Content: the XUL document(s), whose elements define the layout of the user interface
  2. Skin: the CSS and image files, which define the appearance of an application
  3. Locale: the files containing user-visible strings for easy software localization

XUL defines a wide range of elements, which roughly belong to the following types:

  • Top-level elements: window, page, dialog, wizard, etc.
  • Widgets: label, button, text box, list box, combo box, radio button, check box, tree, menu, toolbar, group box, tab box, color-picker, spacer, splitter, etc.
  • Box model: box, grid, stack, deck, etc.
  • Events and scripts: script, command, key, broadcaster, observer, etc.
  • Data source: template, rule, etc.
  • Others: overlay, iframe, browser, editor, etc.

The default behavior of XUL widgets can be altered with XBL bindings.

Example

This example shows three buttons stacked on top of each other in a vertical box container:[13]

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="chrome://global/skin/" type="text/css"?>

<window id="vbox example" title="Example 3...."
xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul">
  <vbox>
    <button id="yes1" label="Yes"/>
    <button id="no1" label="No"/>
    <button id="maybe1" label="Maybe"/>
  </vbox>
</window>

Ghostbusters reference

The villain of the 1984 film Ghostbusters was a deity called Zuul who possesses the character Dana Barrett and declares, "There is no Dana. There is only Zuul".[14] The creators of XUL, which is pronounced the same as Zuul, made the slogan "There is no data. There is only XUL!", part of which became the XML namespace.[15]

gollark: I would quite like the idea of software controlled power switches with physically wired on LEDs (so you can see it's actually off) but have no idea if it would be practical and it's probably too expensive.
gollark: I thought you meant software controlled hard power switches but now I'm confused.
gollark: Wait, how would that work?
gollark: Good enough, then.
gollark: It would be nice to be entirely FOSS, but I'd be happy with just Linux-with-minimal-blobs.

References
  1. "Life After XUL". Mozilla. Retrieved 28 November 2018.
  2. "Problems with XUL". mozilla.github.io. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
  3. Firefox 57 release notes
  4. Kev Needham (2015-08-21). "The Future of Developing Firefox Add-ons". blog.mozilla.org. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  5. "Pale Moon future roadmap". Pale Moon. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  6. "Pale Moon team releases first version of Basilisk browser". ghacks.net. 2017-11-17. Retrieved 2018-04-02.
  7. "Waterfox, Its Legacy and Looking to the Future". Waterfox blog. 2018-04-28. Retrieved 2018-06-20.
  8. Jorge O. Castro (2004-06-15). "Ars Technica sits down with Scott Collins from Mozilla.org". Ars Technica. Retrieved 2018-11-28.
  9. "Remote Application Development with Mozilla, Part 2: A Case Study of the Mozilla Amazon Browser (MAB)". Oreillynet. 2003-02-05.
  10. "UXP vs goanna".
  11. "There is only XUL". Retrieved 18 September 2018.
  12. "Gecko FAQ". Mozilla Developer Center. Mozilla Foundation. 2008-03-15. Retrieved 2009-03-26.
  13. The Box Model - XUL | MDN. Developer.mozilla.org (2012-12-16). Retrieved on 2014-03-28.
  14. Ghostbusters clip
  15. Mozilla XML Namespace
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.