Re: really attracting developers

[Chris Vetter]

On 2006-08-30 19:44:27 +0200 Michael Thaler 
<michael.thaler@physik.tu-muenchen.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 August 2006 14:41, discuss-gnustep-request@gnu.org 
> wrote:
> > True, especially regarding Gecko. However, using libwww WOULD be an
> > idea for writing a _very_ simple webbrowser. I was thinking about
> > that, using libwww as a bundle, so it could be easily replaced in 
> > case
> > WebKit (or something else that's better than libwww) came along.
> What is a _very_ simple webbrowser good for? I don't think many peope 
> are 
> interested in using such a browser if there are far better 
> alternatives like 
> Firefox and Konqueror.

Put it this way: Why is there links, lynx or w3m, when there's Firefox 
or Opera?

If it has a modular struture, it would be a starting point for a more 
complex web browser by replacing existing (simple) plugins with more 
sophisticated ones, like the rendering engine. The original browser 
could use libwww, if something like WebKit would become available, 
simply replace that plugin with one that uses WebKit. Additinal 
plugins, eg for bookmarks, history or a download managre can be added 
later on. Having the simple webbrowser grow into a full blown web 
browser suite.

Additionally, as already pointed out, it can be embedded, eg. for 
context sensitive Help.

It could also be used as a starting point for a CSS/HTML editor (think 
Nexus).

--
Chris