Re: KHTML in GNUStep?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Chris B. Vetter wrote:

> Looking only at the rendering engine, Gecko is about twice as big as
> KHTML - so "porting" KHTML would be, if not easier, at least quicker.

Also, KHTML is far lighter on resources, and dazzlingly faster than Moz
engine.

> Why is everyone so narrow-focused on Gecko/Mozilla anyway?

They've got blinders ;)

> Even Gecko/Mozilla developer admit that it's bloated, compared to KHTML,
> and doesn't implement HTML4 or (even) CSS1 (let alone CSS2) as close as
> should be...
> I'm not saying KHTML is "better" - I'm just wondering.

Compared to Moz, I think KHTML is better because its more recent, and is
being developed primarily as a HTML part for K rather than a whole big
blob which does everything from HTML to EMail to News, etc

~Mayuresh