Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!harrier.ukc.ac.uk!rlh2
From: rlh2@ukc.ac.uk (R.L.Hesketh)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: User Interface Generation Tools
Message-ID: <2662@harrier.ukc.ac.uk>
Date: 5 Oct 89 13:24:24 GMT
References: <181@talarian.UUCP> <1889@bacchus.dec.com>
Reply-To: rlh2@ukc.ac.uk (R.L.Hesketh)
Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
Lines: 21

In article <1889@bacchus.dec.com> klee@decwrl.dec.com writes:
> 
>On the other hand, XBuild claims they will support UIL (DECwindows and
>Motif) in the near future.
>
>Ken Lee

As a side question, UIL doesn't appear to allow new widget classes to be
added to its compiler tables.  I can see one reason why ... programmers
should only be using the DECWindows widget set to stick to the DECWindows
look and feel.  This does seem to be a limiting factor though, and may
put a few people off (me for one).  Of course I would like to be wrong
on this one 8-).  If DEC made a concious decision to be this limiting then
why did they chosen a language?  Surely a graphical, direct manipulation
editor would be much easier for everyone (except the guy who built the
UI Builder in the first place!).  Okay, so UI Builders need to be quite
intelligent to be able to handle creation of something more than just the
static user interface which they can do very well anyway.  But thats
what UIL only does????

Richard Hesketh