XAML

[Jeff]

How important is XAML? (or how important is it expected to become during the
next 5 years?)

Looking for informed opinions.

Thanks!

 

[shiv_koirala]

My two cents do not think about it now.....After 2 years it will be a
better option.

-------
Regards ,
C#, VB.NET , SQL SERVER , UML , DESIGN Patterns Interview question book
http://www.geocities.com/dotnetinterviews/
My Interview Blog
http://spaces.msn.com/members/dotnetinterviews/

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

why are you asking?
it will be there (final release) in about 7 month.
it will work and offer you a worl of opportunity (in term of creativity and
productivity).
On the other hand , it will be new, people won't know it and use it.
So one hand you do more with less, on the other hand you'll have to sell
yoursefl harder to your future boss.
If you're an independant, your customer won't care much about the technology
provided that they work on their computers (Vista is targeting XP, CE,
Vista, PocketPC & MacOSX).

 

[clintonG]

If you're asking for insight and possibilities I perceive XAML will allow us
to build an interactive desktop that is indistinguishable from a "page"
allowing unique applications such as a desktop that functions as an
interactive architectural floorplan or an interactive representation of a
machine for example but as it has been said, all of this will be a few years
away and we will also have to contend with subversive and corrupt
crippleware vendors such as Autodesk who will do everything they can to
prevent this sort of progress.

<%= Clinton Gallagher
METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

I don't see how whatever software politic Autodesk has could impat on the
adoption (or not) of XAML by the developer community?!?

 

[Jeff]

Well, you see, Autodesk is the organization that is *really* controlling
*everything* including the price of gas, middle East policy, organized
crime, and of course XAML. If you don't believe me, just consider that Big
Foot and the Loch Ness monster are both on the payroll of Autodesk.

 

[clintonG]

We will need standardized schemas that can be used for vector geometry. The
Autopimps control the drafting software and have refused to web enable the
drawing file formats which keeps the customer's drawing assets crippled. The
Autopimps bought a seat on a W3C committee to scuttle the adoption of SVG.
Microsoft did the same by the way but at least Microsoft provides
alternatives whereas the Autopimps provide none.

The Autopimps change their file format every two years and have at least a
half-dozen proprietry file viewers which provide basic viewing but cripple
any web enablement and demand fees that must be passed on to a developer's
customer.

The Autopimps software development license states nobody may develop
software that competes with an Autopimp product. Any developer that chooses
to proceed anyway is always at risk of the Autopimps using their slimy
lawyers to steal the software created by a developer with a great idea.

The Autopimps now support the use of the .NET Framework in several of their
products but have not supported web enabling the interface of the products
(they have a FU hyperlink feature in the IDE that has been dysfunctional or
crippled for the last five years) and they have obstructed any means of web
enabling the drawing files themselves. They support "some" use of XML but
only in certai products which have very small markets and only then support
their own crippled schemas with no implementation I am aware of which would
allow other options.

A developer has to pay the Autopimps $1200 every year to have access to
documentation and private developer resources that are not otherwise made
available on the web when downloading their SDK. Its like MSDN in that NFR
software is provided when paying the fee but like the corrupt cable
companies that charge customers for programming they do not want the
Autopimps bundle documentation and resources that are not otherwise
available without having to pay for the NFR that is not needed when a
developer is already a customer and uses a specific product such as
AutoCAD/Architectural Desktop or Revit.

The National Institute of Science and Technology reports the US construction
industry is losing $15 billion annually as a result of crippled software or
lack of software processes. If its true that the Autopimps control most
design and drafting for the US construction industry as it is true that
Microsoft controls most desktop operating systems it must then be true that
the Autopimps are the fundamental reason why the US construction industry is
operating at a $15 billion annual loss.

That's the way I see it. Does that help?

<%= Clinton Gallagher
METROmilwaukee (sm) "A Regional Information Service"
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://metromilwaukee.com/
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/

 

[Scott Allen]

If you look at XAML generically, as a declarative language that
constructs a hierarchy of CLR objects, then I think it's going to be
important. This sort of pattern will be popping up everywhere.

 

[Jeff]

Thanks Scott... could you elaborate a bit?... perhaps point me/us to
additional reading?

-Jeff

 

[Kevin Spencer]

Hi Jeff,

Personally, I believe that XAML will become extremely important over the
next 5 years. It represents a standardization of user interface definition
that is based on XML, and therefore cross-platform-compatible. It uses
vector-based 3D graphics. A XAML user interface could be used in aboth
desktop apps to browser-based apps, and on multiple Operating Systems,
especially when combined with .Net, and with a Framework available for the
target OS.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
You can lead a fish to a bicycle,
but it takes a very long time,
and the bicycle has to *want* to change.

 

[Scott Allen]

Thanks Scott... could you elaborate a bit?... perhaps point me/us to
additional reading?

Well, let's say I write this hunk of XAML:

<Page x:Class="Default_page" Title="Home">
<TextBlock FontSize ="18" TextWrapping="Wrap">
CheckOut
<Hyperlink NavigateUri="page2.xaml">Page 2!</Hyperlink>,
</TextBlock>
</Page>

The first question is - am I describing the UI for a web form, or a UI
for Windows Presentation Framework (WPF)? I don't know just by looking
- it could be either! If I add an XML namespace specific to WPF
(xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/avalon/2005"), then I'd
know.

Everyone associates XAML with WPF at first, but XAML doesn't
necessarily have to be tied to WPF. Let's take a step back even
further.

What am I doing with XAML? I am giving declarative instructions to:

Create a Page object and set the Title property.
Create a TextBlock object with FontSize and TextWrapping properties
set, then add the TextBlock to the Page's content.
Create some literal text, and a Hyperlink object to add the to
TextBlock content.
And so on...

What I'm really doing is providing instructions to build a tree of
managed objects. The tree of objects could represent a window, a
webform, even ...

<SequentialWorkflow x:Class="HelloWorld" >
<SequentialWorkflow.Parameters>
<wcmarameter Name="FirstName" Type="System.String">
<wcmarameter Name="LastName" Type="System.String">
</SequentialWorkflow.Parameters>
<Code ExecuteCode="code1_CodeHandler" ID="code1" />
</SequentialWorkflow>


... a Workflow [1].

Because XAML is general purpose, and because it's toolable (meaning it
will work with designers, compilers, and the tools we write
ourselves), XAML and XAML-like technologies are bound to become more
prevalent in the next 5 years in a number of areas (not just UI), as a
way to manage complexity (because the above XAML snippets cut down on
the amount of code we'd have to write to do the same thing, and
because it is toolable we might not have to make a lot of effort
maintaining the XAML, either).

Of course, because XAML is so toolable, I'm not sure how *visible*
XAML will actually be. It will certainly be behind the scenes of many
tools [2], but not something we work with by hand very much.

[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/building/workflow/

[2]
http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/interactive_designer/default.aspx


I hope this afternoon ramble makes some sense...

 

[Jeff]

Very very helpful. Thanks!

Thanks Scott... could you elaborate a bit?... perhaps point me/us to
additional reading?

Well, let's say I write this hunk of XAML:

<Page x:Class="Default_page" Title="Home">
<TextBlock FontSize ="18" TextWrapping="Wrap">
CheckOut
<Hyperlink NavigateUri="page2.xaml">Page 2!</Hyperlink>,
</TextBlock>
</Page>

The first question is - am I describing the UI for a web form, or a UI
for Windows Presentation Framework (WPF)? I don't know just by looking
- it could be either! If I add an XML namespace specific to WPF
(xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/avalon/2005"), then I'd
know.

Everyone associates XAML with WPF at first, but XAML doesn't
necessarily have to be tied to WPF. Let's take a step back even
further.

What am I doing with XAML? I am giving declarative instructions to:

Create a Page object and set the Title property.
Create a TextBlock object with FontSize and TextWrapping properties
set, then add the TextBlock to the Page's content.
Create some literal text, and a Hyperlink object to add the to
TextBlock content.
And so on...

What I'm really doing is providing instructions to build a tree of
managed objects. The tree of objects could represent a window, a
webform, even ...

<SequentialWorkflow x:Class="HelloWorld" >
<SequentialWorkflow.Parameters>
<wcmarameter Name="FirstName" Type="System.String">
<wcmarameter Name="LastName" Type="System.String">
</SequentialWorkflow.Parameters>
<Code ExecuteCode="code1_CodeHandler" ID="code1" />
</SequentialWorkflow>


.. a Workflow [1].

Because XAML is general purpose, and because it's toolable (meaning it
will work with designers, compilers, and the tools we write
ourselves), XAML and XAML-like technologies are bound to become more
prevalent in the next 5 years in a number of areas (not just UI), as a
way to manage complexity (because the above XAML snippets cut down on
the amount of code we'd have to write to do the same thing, and
because it is toolable we might not have to make a lot of effort
maintaining the XAML, either).

Of course, because XAML is so toolable, I'm not sure how *visible*
XAML will actually be. It will certainly be behind the scenes of many
tools [2], but not something we work with by hand very much.

[1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/building/workflow/

[2]
http://www.microsoft.com/products/expression/en/interactive_designer/default.aspx


I hope this afternoon ramble makes some sense...

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

that's scary man!

Well, you see, Autodesk is the organization that is *really* controlling
*everything* including the price of gas, middle East policy, organized
crime, and of course XAML. If you don't believe me, just consider that Big
Foot and the Loch Ness monster are both on the payroll of Autodesk.

 

[Lloyd Dupont]

That's the way I see it. Does that help?

I see.
A bit of informed feedback is always interesting.