[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Substitute classes
From: |
David Chisnall |
Subject: |
Re: Substitute classes |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:17:24 +0000 |
On 17 Mar 2011, at 14:12, David Ayers wrote:
> This is also no legal advice, but from
> http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/Source/WebKit/LICENSE
> I gather that Apple is the copyright holder of WebKit. If that is truly
> the case, Apple is not bound by the LGPL. They have the right to do
> whatever they please. It is merely the license by which Apple's users
> are bound by.
WebKit means two things. It means the Objective-C framework, and it means the
umbrella project. The Objective-C framework is written and owned by Apple.
The umbrella project includes things like WebCore - which does the real work of
HTML parsing / layout - that the WebKit framework link against. WebCore was
originally KHTML (part of the KDE project), and has accepted contributions
since then by companies like Adobe, Nokia, Google, and so on. WebCore is
LGPL'd and is not owned (exclusively) by Apple. When people talk about WebKit,
they usually mean the umbrella project - Chrome doesn't actually use
WebKit-the-framework, it just uses the things that WebKit-the-framework wraps.
David
-- Sent from my PDP-11