.NET UI Standard

[weitzhandler]

The .NET Standard was a great solution to overcome the various shapes of .NET and all its flavors.
This repo is to solve this issue, but is oddly named 'XAML Standard', when what it should really solve is the contract or model any .NET UI Framework has to implement, like .NET Standard, but for UI.

So my suggestion is either make this repo a place for defining the .NET UI Standard and rename it accordingly, or keep this repo as XAML specific, and open a new repo that aims to lay out a comprehensive standard of UI features any .NET UI Standard compliant framework is committed to implement.

Based on: [Proposal] .NET UI Standard

Related:

• Port System.Xaml to .NET Core
• Xamarin.Forms Drawing Spec
• Is XAML Standard dead?
• XAML Standard API
• YouTube: The Future of .NET on the Desktop

[birbilis]

Actually there's a problem with using the .NET term everywhere, since XAML standard is also for UWP and from what I understand UWP isn't targeted by .NET apps only, but by native apps too (pls correct me if I've got it wrong). XAML Standard isn't bad as a term since the current effort focuses on XAML (reconciliating XAML vocabularies) anyway.

It just would be nice if it was formally described, instead of just having some text posts here. And I mean formally described in a machine readable way (not just some document, those should be autogenerated) in a public repo where people could do pull requests. You could also have profiles (targeting say different form factors). Would have releases (as immutable interfaces with versioning like in COM), eventually some deprecations etc.

One could think that could be done in XSD too if the XAML and backend API was the same (in the past I've seen cases where you couldn't convert all XAML to just C# code, think I was using Silverlight then).

But using C# interfaces (and structures where interfaces don't cover all needs) would probably be the best choice (XSD can be quite verbose I guess). Also structured comments in the C# declarations could help in autogenerating documentation in a formal way targeting humans (at least those who prefer specs instead of reading "code")

[weitzhandler]

@birbilis so what. UWP can choose if it is .NET UI Standard compliant or not, much like it's up to any .NET provider to decide if it's .NET Standard compliant. That doesn't mean that they don't support other libs that are not tied with the Standard (e.g. native). I am not talking about XAML at all, which should be an optional appendix.

[weitzhandler]

OK posted it here please vote!