FXML [was The Next Great Thing: An Application Framework]

Jeff McDonald deep.blue.6802 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 13 03:04:06 PST 2012

 Daniel Zwolenski <zonski at googlemail.com>  wrote:

>>On a related front, two other areas that in my mind probably would have
been better off external to JFX are:

>> FXML: it is built on-top of JFX and so does not need to be part of the
core. It also implies a certain MVC architecture, and
>> as we've seen that's not ubiquitous (nor is the architecture style
chosen particularly in-line with at least a sub-section of the
>> community which is an example of the sorts of complications an
Application framework creates)

Isn't FXML development closely tied to the components/styles/properties of
a specific release version. If so, then developing the JavaFX core and FXML
in lock-step is the way to go, otherwise there would be version concerns.

FXML is still a "what is it?" kinda thing for me. At first I thought it was
more like a serialization format for JavaFX, but there seems to be more to
it. It would be nice to call some like FXML.build("my_window.fxml") and
then get a nice object graph back.

At least the JavaFX team didn't follow Microsoft's lead and add partial
classes to Java like MS did in .net.

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list