Ours is an open-source Mac application localized by volunteers. These volunteers will do their work on special localization builds of the software (with unstripped nibs), then send us the changes to integrate into the original xib and strings files.
The problem is that, while there is a way to integrate string changes without blowing away previous size changes, I can't see a way to integrate new string and size changes (as when we add or replace views).
The only way to do both that I can see is for localizers to work directly with the original xibs and send us diffs. That means they have to download the entire source code, not just a localizable version of the release, work in Xcode as well as IB, and either run the diff command themselves (per xib) or install and use Mercurial.
Is there any better way for a xib-based application?
UPDATE January 2014: Apple’s ‘autolayout’ code combined with their ‘Base’ localization stuff took most my ideas and improved on them. I recommend against using my old tools that I talk about in this answer. But, also, man was I right!
I strongly strongly STRONGLY recommend against frame changes in localizations. I know this runs counter to Apple's advice, but there are SO MANY problems with allowing frame changes - you end up with a billion edge cases.
Imagine you have 10 XIBs in your app, and you support 12 languages. You've got 120 different layouts to support, now. You just can't do this.
Change the strings, leave the views where they are. Make 'em bigger in ALL languages, if you need to. It sounds like this shouldn't work but it does. (I won three Apple Design Awards with an app that's localized in 10 or so languages this way.)
Specifics:
For radio and checkboxes, just let them extend far to the right, beyond the last English character. That also provides a nice big landing area for imprecise mousers.
For buttons, they should be wide anyhow, because it never looks good to have text cramped in the middle of the buttons.
For titles on tableview columns, you should autosize when you load 'em up, if needed.
For explanatory text, you should have some extra space to the right, and maybe an extra line. It just makes the English version of the XIB seem less cluttered. Sure, the Germans are going to see a slightly tighter XIB, but, hey, they're Germans -- they're probably used to that. There's probably even a German word for it. "Deutscheninterfakkenclutterlongen."
If a text field is centered, just add equal space on both sides. There's no reason not to.
I've combined this with scripts that suck all the strings out of my XIBs and put them in .strings files, and then dynamically put the strings back at run-time, so anyone can localize my app without any special tools. Just drop in a bunch of .strings files and run it!
Blog post including full source: [Lost in Translations]¹.
I confess that I'm not all that familiar with the process of localizing Mac apps. But I did run across a script that's part of the Three20 iPhone library that seems like it might be useful: diffstrings.py is a Python script that "compares your primary locale with all your other locales to help you determine which new strings need to be translated. It outputs XML files which can be translated, and then merged back into your strings files."
EDIT: As a companion to Wil Shipley's answer to this question, I'll add a link to a blog post he just wrote that goes into more detail about localization, and provides some of the tools that he's built to ease the process.
Where I used to work, we had this issue as well. Our app was getting translated into 10 different languages.
At first, we tried doing what Wil suggested, which is to make everything super wide and fit in every language. Unfortunately, "online backup" might be pretty short in English, but in other languages (especially Spanish), it's really long ("copia de seguridad" just means "backup"). Widening our UI made everything look pretty terrible.
One day, I was playing around with some Core Animation stuff and discovered the CAConstraint class. CAConstraint is basically a way to define a layout relationship between two CALayers. You give one layer a name (like "layerA") and then say "layerB is constrained [in such-and-such a way] to a sibling layer called layerA". Then, whenever the layer named layerA is repositioned or resized, layerB automatically moves as well. It's really neat, and it's just what we were looking for.
After a couple of days of work, I came up with what is now CHLayoutManager. It's basically a re-make of CAConstraint and friends, but for NSViews. Here's a simple example of how it works:
CHLayoutConstraint * centerHorizontal = [CHLayoutConstraint constraintWithAttribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMidX relativeTo:#"superview" attribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMidX];
CHLayoutConstraint * centerVertical = [CHLayoutConstraint constraintWithAttribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMidY relativeTo:#"superview" attribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMidY];
[aView addConstraint:centerHorizontal];
[aView addConstraint:centerVertical];
This will keep aView centered in its superview, regardless of how the superview is resized. Here's another:
[button1 setLayoutName:#"button1"];
[button2 addConstraint:[CHLayoutConstraint constraintWithAttribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMinX relativeTo:#"button1" attribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMaxX]];
[button2 addConstraint:[CHLayoutConstraint constraintWithAttribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMaxY relativeTo:#"button1" attribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeMaxY]];
[button2 addConstraint:[CHLayoutConstraint constraintWithAttribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeWidth relativeTo:#"button1" attribute:CHLayoutConstraintAttributeWidth]];
This will keep button2 anchored to the right edge of button1, as well as keeping button2's Y position and width the same as button1's.
Internally, CHLayoutManager uses an NSValueTransformer to calculate the new positioning information. Some of the CHLayoutConstraint initializers accept an NSValueTransformer, so you can create arbitrarily complex layout manipulations.
We used this for constraining and laying out the entire UI, and then doing all of the localization in code (and subsequently calling -sizeToFit, with some modifications). Our UI would just flow into its final layout. It turned out to be extremely convenient. We'd just package up our .strings files, send them off to the translators, and then drop them in to place when we got them back, and our app would instantly be localized for that language.
CHLayoutManager isn't perfect. It doesn't resolve conflicts, but simply applies constraints in the order they're added. So you can constrain (for example) the MinX of a view 42 different ways, but only the last one will be used. Also, if you constrain the MinX and the MaxX, they'll also be applied in the order they're added and will not end up stretching or shrinking the width. In other words, constraining one attribute of a view will not affect the other attributes. It's compatible with 10.5+ (GC and non). However, due to some changes in Lion, it's unlikely that I'll address the shortcomings.
Despite these shortcomings, it's an extremely flexible framework, and (IMO) some pretty nifty code. (Plus, I swizzle -[NSView dealloc]! Yay!)
Update
Now that AppKit has this same functionality (via NSLayoutConstraint), I recommend using that system instead of CHLayoutManager. It is far more robust.
Bear in mind that XIB files are merely XML files in an obscure format, so you can translate those easily enough, provided that you can find what strings there are there to translate in the first place. For example, here's the snippet that creates a button called Jenson:
<object class="NSButtonCell" key="NSCell" id="41219959">
<int key="NSCellFlags">67239424</int>
<int key="NSCellFlags2">134217728</int>
<string key="NSContents">Jenson</string>
...
</object>
So you can get that string translated and then substitute occurrences of it in the XIB with your translated value. In order to verify it's working as expected, you could change the language to use random keys instead (like BUTTON_TITLE) which will make it easier to spot when one's missing.
However, the positions/sizes of the items are fixed, so you can have titles that overflow the space given in a different language. That's one of the reasons why Macs have separate XIB files for every language, to allow adjustments to be made on a language-by-language basis, however difficult it is to maintain.
Related
I wanted to know from someone with field experience, what the best practice of implementing a programm, with UI or CMD in multiple languages (letting the user choose e.g. between English, French, German) is.
If there already exists a discussion about this topic I would be grateful, if somebody could send me a link to it, the first few Google searches I only found things like how to choose a programming language
The first options that came to my mind where switch(globalStringLanguage) and #ifdef GERMAN #define PROGRESS Fortschritt... .
Would really like to know, if there is a best practice out there(and which one that would be) and how you guys implement it in your firm.
Thanks in advance for the replies,
1973ProgrammingDude
There are 4 'best practices / topics' that you can research:-
i18n - internationalisation
This is more about the way you design software. You design buttons etc. to 'lookup' the text they should contain from a dictionary file rather than hard coding them into your source code.
It also applies to things like dates and currency and allow them to be formatted differently depending on the language / locale.
If you design your product correctly you should be able to change all the text on buttons, links etc. and change the date format, currency formatting etc. with one language variable being changed.
Think of this part as designing your system to account for translation, local formatting and even right to left layouts for languages such as Arabic that are read from the right to the left
l10n - localisation
This is the process that follows on from designing your system under i18n. You would define formatting options so dates etc. are correct.
You would also define wording of buttons etc. so they are correct.
Finally you would also have a system so that content could be translated for the given locale.
Think of this part as the actual translation process.
l12y - Localisability
pretty much covers the process and considerations of l10n - just mentioned so you can research it for more complex scenarios and implementation ideas.
g11n - Globalisation
Encompasses all of the above standards, yet again just mentioned for reference as it occasionally throws up some different articles on Google when searching on how to solve a particular problem.
Quick sanity checks
When designing a system that supports glln it easier to have a couple of points to help make you think about decisions you are making.
If you enter ANY plain text within HTML tags / controls / whatever is applicable to your chosen programming language then you will likely have made a mistake. Every item of plain text should be programmatically inserted into a page.
Design a dictionary system - for every piece of plain text you want to add to the site add it to a dictionary. The dictionary can be a simple key:value list if you need with the key being the English translation and the Value being the translation for your locale. Make sure that you start with English:English translations so you can make sure you don't miss any. I would recommend JSON arrays as most translation companies will now understand how to use these nowadays without you needing to design a user interface for them.
When designing a widget / component consider implications of longer text - just because a layout works in English (i.e. a button group fits on one line) doesn't mean it will work in another. Some languages may be 3 times longer for the translation of a word so you must consider this when designing a layout.
Everything should be designed so it can easily be reversed. Right To Left versions of everything should be easy to implement so design your system so only a couple of variables need changing to create the RTL version. (i.e. if web based have a main CSS definition of a widget and then make sure a global CSS class applied to the body can switch the layout).
It isn't just text -> imagery needs to be different as different cultures will interpret an image differently. Also iconography should be internationalised as well as a dollar bill icon doesn't work well to represent money in the UK, never mind in other countries.
CSS Example but the principle applies to all languages / platforms
.widget{
//define general styles
}
.left-to-right .widget{
//add some formatting to adjust layout for left-to-right languages such as English when the 'left-to-right' global variable is set.
margin-left: 20px;
}
.right-to-left .widget{
//add some formatting to adjust layout for right-to-left languages such as Arabic when the 'right-to-left' global variable is set.
margin-right: 0px;
}
Say we have an overlay DHTML panel on a web page that contains two buttons in the top occupying whole width of the dialog, like this:
Text for Button 1 and Button 2 should be localized. Content of checkbox group is static and should not be localized.
There can be a big difference between button text width in different languages (~100% extra space in comparison with English version).
The question is which strategy to apply for sizing Button 1 and Button 2 depending on the length of the text content:
Make buttons fixed width and truncate text content with ellipsis.
Make buttons fixed width and wrap text content on the subsequent lines making buttons grow in height.
Make buttons fixed width but make them wide enough to host text in all languages without truncation or wrapping.
Make buttons dynamically adjust width and make panel grow horizontally with their size.
I am leaning towards using third or forth option according to the several UI localization best practices that were found:
Preparing the User Interface for Localization
Best Practices for Globalization and Localization
Globalization Step-by-Step - UI Considerations
Still we have some debate in the team discussing the best option and it would be interesting to hear concious outer voice of the community.
I am interested in the best approach for this specific case as well general guidelines for solving web UI sizing issues in regards of localization.
Thanks!
As you perhaps know, text shortened with ellipsis (or with a single dot) could be incomprehensible:
How compr. is th.?
You should seen a lot of this staff in mobile area (phones, tablets, etc.), such translations look ugly. OK, with lower screen resolutions you actually end up with no choice (unless you can create some auto-scrolling text). But in case of web interface you certainly have a choice.
Typically, there are two kind of solutions corresponding to your points #3 and #4. Personally, I am leaning to #4 - make buttons auto-sizable. This of course will result with inconsistently sized buttons, but there is little we can do about it.
If you cannot use solution #4 (i.e. UI Designer is strong opponent of this technique), you may modify solution #3 a bit. Basically, what I used in past projects was, I had buttons of fixed sizes and default size was capable to fit most of languages (except Polish and Russian of course), but I also had several CSS classes that defined wider buttons. When localizing into "too long" languages I simply used the most wide button class I could. If the text still didn't fit, then I asked the translators for shortening it (usually re-phrasing it and shorten the text with a single dot as a last resort).
However, please keep in mind that it increases localization costs. This is the reason I would not recommend this method.
As for solution #2, you will end up with ugly looking UI. You simply have no control over how browser will wrap a text, and you will have a lot of texts that go outside the button clipping rectangle (overlap it).
As for solution #1, using ellipsis is a bad idea for two reasons. First one is, ellipsis is not valid in many languages (this especially regards to Asian languages). The second one is, as I understand you want to do that automatically. In this case, you won't be able to measure strings - their actual, on screen size, written with a fall-back font. In case of web UI, you don't know whether user has particular font installed, so you will be guessing the size (OK, with Dojo you can theoretically measure it on the client side). This will of course result in overlapping text (if you decide on dynamic shortening over your chosen font) or totally incomprehensible text (if you decide on shortening after say 8 characters). I had a project which started to use static shortening, it was a total mess. Then we switch to dynamic and it is still not good enough.
To counter potential UI Designer argument that goes "we have no space for string expansion", I can only say that means that you designed the interface incorrectly for it is too crowded. This is the point where I18n goes hand in hand with UI design best practices: strive for simplicity (in UI design). The result would be easy to use and easy to localize application.
I tried to sign up, but I was unable; perhaps a problem from my side. Hopefully I'll get an answer as anonymous.
I apologize for the grammar/syntax, but English isn't my native language.
Recently I lost my job, so I have enough spare time to try something fun. I decided to create a simple text RPG game for me and some friends. It will very close to the board games like Talisman, Dungeon Run, and HeroQuest, using dice and a simple attribute/skill system. So no 3d graphics. The only 2d element, if I decide to include it, will be a map
that will allow the hero to move between locations. Currently I'm using Windows XP SP3, for the game I use wxDev-C++, and although cross platform would be cool, I don't really care.
I have some experience in C++ (currently using wxDev-C++), but I'm far from being called an expert or even a great programmer. I was about to start writing parts of the code, but I decided to check if creating a GUI for the game is possible. In some forums, many suggested I use Qt, CEGUI or wxWidgets, but most examples I saw are grey boxes that are
indifferent at best, when I want something that fits better in a fantasy setting. I don't claim I would do better, but I want a GUI that is more fantasy related.
What I want from the GUI:
1. A "cool" Gui with decent graphics. I could even create an image to serve as a mask in Photoshop, but the GUI builder will have to support imported images.
2. A relatively large textbox in the middle (with a scrollbar) that will display die rolls, damage and options.
3. The ability to display dynamically values (like the change in the health after each action without requiring to refresh manually)
4. Display an icon or a small image of the character in the area where I display stats/abilities.
5. Open new windows created with tha same GUI builder to allocate points, buy/sell things and open a map.
About the map in the game: I decided to create a map in photoshop. When the hero decides to move to another location, a new window will open showing the map. I thought of 2 possible ways to move between locations: 1) Create hotspots on the image and select one by clicking on the name of the location.(I dare not think about the complexity of this so we
move to idea #2) and 2) Have the image as a backgroung to a grid with vertical and horizontal coordinates. When the hero selects a new area to visit, he clicks on the area, but what he really does is click on the grid, which returns the two values (x,y) of the location and informs the game about the area the hero wants to visit.
Yeah, yeah, I know it's too much, so what I'm most interested in are the 1-3. I know that even if they are possible, it will propably take forever, but as I said I have spare time, and I like learning new things. I apologize for the size of the post, but I decided to post as many info as possible so you know what I want.
If any of you has used Qt, CEGUI or wxWidgets could you tell which covers most of my criteria? I saw some great stuff build with CEGUI, but I don't know if it is too hard to learn?
Thank in advance.
I know my answer comes pretty late, I only recently started using stackoverflow fairly recently, but maybe this response will help anybody.
CEGUI fully supports skinning widgets using XML. Our CEED editor (WYSIWYG) fully supports layout editing, but the skinning editor (LNF editor) is not finished as of now (11.11.2014), the development version supports exchanging images however and changing sizes and proportions, but more advanced adjustments have to be done in XML.
CEGUI has an imageset editor, fully supported by the CEED editor. Creating imagesets (sets of named subimages, with position and dimension inside a big texture atlas) is supported there. Additionally there is a way to create imagesets from just a bunch of jpg/png/... files using a tool. You would have to ask for specifics in the forum though because it is not integrated into CEED yet.
So basically with CEGUI you are free to make whatever fantasy GUI you want. Skinning simple elements like buttons and progress bars isn't much work in XML anyways. Without the finished editor, some more advanced widgets are more work to skin, but many skins have already been created done this way and some of them are even publically available in the forum and in the CEGUI stock files.
StaticText widgets supports what you want, you can even use images in there or change fonts and colours in the text if you want. Scrollbars are supported too.
I am not sure what you mean by this. You have to specify this.
A simple "Generic/Image" widget is available in CEGUI for this purpose. You can use precreated images or even RTT textures.
You can create and destroy windows in CEGUI without issues.
Regarding the map: I m not sure what you mean, but getting the position of a click in respect to an image (representing the map) is possible in CEGUI.
CEGUI is not particularly hard to learn. There is always the forums and the chat if you got questions. For an Open Source project it is quite well documented so if you read all of the API docu, and look at the supplied samples in the sample browser, you should already get quite far. And for everything additional there is the forum (search), the IRC chat and a community wiki (mind the targeted versions of an article there though)
For a project like yours, CEGUI seems perfectly suited (this is what it was created for in the first place). Qt is not really optimal for games for numerous reasons. wxWidgets I have never used.
I am writing a app which has about 10 nib files for conveying different UI messages and for taking user input. I want to know how to localize these messages that appear on my custom sheets. Is there any way i can have a single file with generic strings and depending on language it replaces the generic string with string in that particular language. also i want to know how to load dynamic strings into messages in custom sheets like file names or the number of files selected etc.
i have taken a look at ibtool but doesnt it duplicate the nib files by creating .lproj files for different languages? doing this simply makes the size of my app huge.
Thanks
At a Boston cocoa-heads meeting a while ago, we discussed this topic and came to a consensus that where two decent approaches.
1 - The first is it either use IBTool or manually make separate nibs.
2 - Gain programatic access to your labels and change the text programatically. Mipadi mentions Localizable.strings as being useful. To gain programatic access, you can either wire-up each label through IB, or you could do some king of walk-the-nib magic and find all of the labels (exercise left to the reader).
Pick whichever method fits your particular app.
Hope this helps,
JJ
This question might help: IPhone localization: Is it possible to translate nib files...
Standard practice is to have a nib for each language.
Your nibs shouldn't be more than 50-100 KB unless they're storing some uncompressed bitmap images, in which case you should load those images in code. Some components, like NSPathControl, will store uncompressed icons in the nib and add a few MB to the nib.
If you have a large .xib file open it in TextEdit and it should be obvious what's taking up all the space.
Probably worth to note that the current approach with Mac OS X 10.8 and auto-layout doesn't require multiple nibs anymore but a single .xib/.nib plus .strings files for each language.
The Times They Are A-Changin :-)
In addition to what Darren already posted, I would like to note that if you know most of your users are going to use English (or whatever the overwhelmingly most common language is), many developers will offer an English-only download that doesn't contain the nibs for other languages (thus reducing app size), and then also provide a multilingual download if desired.
Also, if you're programmatically generated UI elements, you'll want to take a look at the information for Localizable.strings, which is a text file containing translations for strings used programatically.
Wil Shipley recommends, and provides code for, localizing your nib files from strings files at run time.
Is there some standard way to make my applications skinnable?
By "skinnable" I mean the ability of the application to support multiple skins.
I am not targeting any particular platform here. Just want to know if there are any general guidelines for making applications skinnable.
It looks like skinning web applications is relatively easy. What about desktop applications?
Skins are just Yet Another Level Of Abstraction (YALOA!).
If you read up on the MVC design pattern then you'll understand many of the principles needed.
The presentation layer (or skin) only has to do a few things:
Show the interface
When certain actions are taken (clicking, entering text in a box, etc) then it triggers actions
It has to receive notices from the model and controller when it needs to change
In a normal program this abstraction is done by having code which connects the text boxes to the methods and objects they are related to, and having code which changes the display based on the program commands.
If you want to add skinning you need to take that ability and make it so that can be done without compiling the code again.
Check out, for instance, XUL and see how it's done there. You'll find a lot of skinning projects use XML to describe the various 'faces' of the skin (it playing music, or organizing the library for an MP3 player skin), and then where each control is located and what data and methods it should be attached to in the program.
It can seem hard until you do it, then you realize it's just like any other level of abstraction you've dealt with before (from a program with gotos, to control structures, to functions, to structures, to classes and objects, to JIT compilers, etc).
The initial learning curve isn't trivial, but do a few projects and you'll find it's not hard.
-Adam
Keep all your styles in a separate CSS file(s)
Stay away from any inline styling
It really depends on how "skinnable" you want your apps to be. Letting the user configure colors and images is going to be a lot easier than letting them hide/remove components or even write their own components.
For most cases, you can probably get away with writing some kind of Resource Provider that serves up colors and images instead of hardcoding them in your source file. So, this:
Color backgroundColor = Color.BLUE;
Would become something like:
Color backgroundColor = ResourceManager.getColor("form.background");
Then, all you have to do is change the mappings in your ResourceManager class and all clients will be consistent. If you want to do this in real-time, changing any of the ResourceManager's mappings will probably send out an event to its clients and notify them that something has changed. Then the clients can redraw their components if they want to.
Implementation varies by platform, but here are a few general cross-platform considerations:
It is good to have an established overall layout into which visual elements can be "plugged." It's harder (but still possible) to support completely different general layouts through skinning.
Develop a well-documented naming convention for the assets (images, HTML fragments, etc.) that comprise a skin.
Design a clean way to "discover" existing skins and add new ones. For example: Winamp uses a ZIP file format to store all the images for its skins. All the skin files reside in a well-known folder off the application folder.
Be aware of scaling issues. Not everyone uses the same screen resolution.
Are you going to allow third-party skin development? This will affect your design.
Architecturally, the Model-View-Controller pattern lends itself to skinning.
These are just a few things to be aware of. Your implementation will vary between web and fat client, and by your feature requirements. HTH.
The basic principle is that used by CSS in web pages.
Rather than ever specifying the formatting (colour / font / layout[to some extent]) of your content, you simply describe what kind of content it is.
To give a web example, in the content for a blog page you might mark different sections as being an:
Title
Blog Entry
Archive Pane
etc.
The Entry might be made of severl subsections such as "heading", "body" and "timestamp".
Then, elsewhere you have a stylesheet which specifies all the properties of each kind of element, size, alignment, colour, background, font etc. When rendering the page or srawing / initialising the componatns in your UI you always consult the current stylesheet to look up these properties.
Then, skinning, and indeed editing your design, becomes MUCH easier. You simple create a different stylesheet and tweak the values to your heat's content.
Edit:
One key point to remember is the distinction between a general style (like classes in CSS) and a specific style (like ID's in CSS). You want to be able to uniquely identify some items in your layout, such as the heading, as being a single identifiable item that you can apply a unique style to, whereas other items (such as an entry in a blog, or a field in a database view) will all want to have the same style.
It's different for each platform/technology.
For WPF, take a look at what Josh Smith calls structural skinning: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/podder2.aspx
This should be relatively easy, follow these steps:
Strip out all styling for your entire web application or website
Use css to change the way your app looks.
For more information visit css zen garden for ideas.
You shouldn't. Or at least you should ask yourself if it's really the right decision.
Skinning breaks the UI design guidelines. It "jars" the user because your skinned app operates and looks totally different from all the other apps their using. Things like command shortcut keys won't be consistent and they'll lose productivity. It will be less handicapped accessible because screen readers will have a harder time understanding it.
There are a ton of reasons NOT to skin. If you just want to make your application visually distinct, that's a poor reason in my opinion. You will make your app harder to use and less likely that people will ever go beyond the trial period.
Having said all that, there are some classes of apps where skinning is basically expected, such as media players and imersive full screen games. But if your app isn't in a class where skinning is largely mandated, I would seriously consider finding other ways to make your app better than your competition.
Depending on how deep you wish to dig, you can opt to use a 'formatting' framework (e.g. Java's PLAF, the web's CSS), or an entirely decoupled multiple tier architecture.
If you want to define a pluggable skin, you need to consider that from the very beginning. The presentation layer knows nothing about the business logic but it's API and vice versa.
It seems most of the people here refer to CSS, as if its the only skinning option.
Windows Media Player (and Winamp, AFAIR) use XML as well as images (if neccesary) to define a skin.
The XML references hooks, events, etc. and handles how things look and react. I'm not sure about how they handle the back end, but loading a given skin is really as simply as locating the appropriate XML file, loading the images then placing them where they need to go.
XML also gives you far more control over what you can do (i.e. create new components, change component sizes, etc.).
XML combined with CSS could give wonderful results for a skinning engine of a desktop or web application.