chofmann at meer.net
Fri, 03 Dec 2004 08:26:56 -0800
Ben Goodger wrote:
> Robert O'Callahan wrote:
>> I don't like the name 'libxul'. Most embedders think they're
>> embedding Gecko, not XUL. Seems to me it would make a lot more sense
>> to call it "libgecko".
>> Brendan says that many embedders don't want XUL. Too bad; if we're
>> going to have a single shared Gecko library, it has to have XUL ---
>> "Firefox demands it". And for XUL-resistant embedders, calling it
>> "libgecko" and leaving XUL in the fine print is better marketing,
>> anyway, IMHO.
> Marketing anything to Windows developers as "lib-anything" is a little
> weird anyway, it's a decidedly Unixy name ;-) (Even if platform build
> system conventions would likely yield xul.dll vs. libxul.so)
maybe something like the Mozilla Application Platform (map.dll | so)