Re: Changes I've been thinking of...

[address@hidden]

On 13 Okt., 10:34, Derek Fawcus <dfaw...@cisco.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 07:33:19PM +0200, Michael Thaler wrote:
> > > Because of lack of developer resources. Browser is a huge and complex
> > > project by itself. Second, it's really hard to implement such complex
> > > project as web browser that based on incomplete and buggy application kit.
>
> > You don't have to implement the whole browser yourself. Just take some
> > existing rendering engine and build a user interface around it. I guess 
> > webkit
> > would be the obvious choice. There are projects doing this for KDE:
>
> >http://rekonq.sourceforge.net/
> >http://code.google.com/p/arora/
>
> > I think at least rekonq is a hobby project of a single person. But you are
> > right, it is probably still a lot of work, especially because there is 
> > nothing
> > like QtWebkit which these browsers use.
>
> Or how about porting Camino (http://caminobrowser.org/)?
>
> Which is a Cocoa wrapper around the mozilla (gecko) rendering engine; and 
> since
> the release version still supports OSX 10.3,  the necessary API burden is not
> too great (the development branch requires OSX 10.4).
>
> .pdf

Ahem.
I think you all don't know that GNUstep already has its own rendering
engine. Called "SimpleWebKit" + "NSTextView". And a Browser called
"Vespucci". Already does render a lot of pages. At least as good as
Dillo.

When I find some more time, I will finalize CSS. And if someone
implements NSTextBlock (tables) in NSTextView we will not pass Acid
but 80% of the web will be rendered readable. Of course, ECMAScript is
another area of work.

So, please don't propose (that others) port some other rendering
engine or browser. Please work on what we already have. Especially ">
> > Because of lack of developer resources."

Nikolaus