[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty))
From: |
jhclouse |
Subject: |
Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)) |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:26:23 -0800 |
<<Quite offending talk, don't you also think so?>>
It wasn't intended to be. I just felt the need to amplify what Mark had said
about the task of web compatibility and the massive task that building a
resilient rendering engine is. It wasn't directed at you or your efforts,
which are perfectly fine. (I was tired when I wrote the email and probably
didn't communicate effectively.)
<<And: where would Linux or GNUstep or Gecko or IE or WebKit be now if they had
followed your recommendations? We would still all use BSD and Netscape 1.0.
Period.>>
Those projects went through many years of testing web applications, complicated
CSS layouts, buggy JavaScript code, crazy user input and server output, etc.
The sheer amount of stuff they've learned to account for over the years is
staggering. It's not easy to create an end-user web browsing renderer that
accounts for these things in a short amount of time.
<<How do you know before you have done it? Can you predict the future? And has
the pure number of developers ever been an indicator for project success?>>
Because I've observed the chaotic nature of web development. Even people who
are fanatical about standards cannot agree on what they really mean and what
the best practices are. Just take a look at some of the flame-fests over XHTML
vs. HTML and semantic markup vs. preserving
deprecated-but-not-necessarily-deprecated tags like B and I. And then there
are all the subtle interractions between CSS rules. And the people who use
FrontPage because they don't know better. And the pages written in Notepad in
1994. And on and on and on. That's why I say it's a lot more complicated than
just following the specs if you want a web browser (the original topic of this
thread) for end-users.
But, as I say, your design goals are not a web browser, so this doesn't really
apply to your valiant efforts. (And if, by some miracle, you produce the next
great browser, I'll be first in line to shake your hand!)
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), address@hidden, 2007/03/24
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), Riccardo, 2007/03/25
- Message not available
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), address@hidden, 2007/03/23
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), Helge Hess, 2007/03/25
- Message not available
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), address@hidden, 2007/03/25
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), Helge Hess, 2007/03/25
- Message not available
- Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)), address@hidden, 2007/03/26
Re: SimpleWebKit (was GNUstep Web browser (was Re: WebKit Bounty)),
jhclouse <=