Re: Question about html widget.

[James Su <suzhe turbolinux com cn>]

Hi,
I think we need have a tiny html widget which only depends on gtk2 (like 
gtkhtml2). Such kind of html widget is very suitable for
embedded and small system in which a gecko too big and slow. So it'll be 
great if gtkhtml2 can be maintained and developed furthor more.

Regards
James Su

Biswapesh Chattopadhyay wrote:

> About a year or so back, I proposed that a decent solution might be to
> port KHTML (the KDE HTML widget) to GTK+. My reasons for this were:
>
> 1. It's fast and lightweight.
> 2. It has support for native widgets, DOM and CSS
> 3. It supports editing (since KMail uses it)
> 4. People have already done it so it should not be too hard to do (At
> that time AtheOS had done it. Much later, Apple announced that they have
> done it as well).
>
> However, this was shouted down maily because people felt that:
>
> 1. Too much effort was involved, effort better spent in improving the
> existing widgets
> 2. It was not as good as mozilla and we should all be using Mozilla
> anyway.
> 3. It had a K in it ? ;-)
>
> However, currently (using CVS Mozilla) Mozilla has come far enough so
> that:
>
> 1. It is faster than Gtkhtml1, gtkhtml2 and khtml
> 2. It is not that heavyweight (at least, on modern machines)
> 3. It supports CSS, DOM, etc. pretty well.
> 4. It supports editing (though the interface is not yet frozen and there
> are some known limitations AFAIK)
> 5. It supports native look and feel (not yet in form widgets sadly, but
> that IMO is not that important)
> 6. The "huge dependency" bit will go away when they release the GRE (I
> think it is expected to be within 2M compressed)
> 7. The API is quite stable (at least, if you use GtkMozEmbed and don't
> try anything too fancy)
> 8. The GTK2 version is very stable and supports all features of the GTk1
> version (thgouh it is probably a bit slow)
>
> So, given the situation, I personally feel that we should push towards
> using Mozilla for all our HTML rendering/editing needs in the near
> future.
>
> On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 15:39, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
>  
>
> > tor 2003-03-13 klockan 10.35 skrev Bastien Nocera:
> >    
> >
> > > On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 05:15, James Henstridge wrote:
> > >      
> > >
> > > > Unless you compile devhelp to use GtkMozEmbed ...
> > > >        
> > > Unless you compile yelp to use gtkhtml-3.0 ;)
> > >      
> > /me hides :)
> >
> > Seriously, the HTML widget situation in GNOME is a mess.
> >
> > Basically what we have is:
> >
> > Gtkhtml (which is named gtkhtml-3.0 in GNOME2):
> > + Editing (needed by Evolution)
> > + Fast
> > - Doesn't support CSS
> > - Doesn't build a DOM tree
> >
> > Gtkhtml2:
> > + CSS
> > + DOM tree
> > - Buggy
> > - Unmaintained (Padraig is fixing bugs but I don't think he does any
> >                development on it, is that correct Padraig?)
> >
> > Gecko:
> > + Support pretty much everything
> > - Doesn't support native widgets for everything (like scrollbars)
> > - Makes a huge dependency with depending on Mozilla
> >
> > The reason I use what I use in Yelp and Devhelp is:
> >
> > Yelp needs to be accessable and therefor needs CSS and DOM, it also
> > needs to use the theme settings for background color, fonts and other
> > style settings. Therefor only Gtkhtml2 currently live up to that.
> >
> > In Devhelp I use Gtkhtml2 pretty much since I used it in Yelp. However
> > Gtkhtml2 shows several bugs when used in Devhelp that isn't noticable in
> > Yelp so I added Gecko as an optional support to be able to use that
> > myself. According to Richard there are some extra startup time when you
> > run with Gecko, nothing I've noticed though.
> >
> > Regards and hope it helpts,
> >  Micke
> >
> > --
> > Mikael Hallendal                micke codefactory se
> > CodeFactory AB                  http://www.codefactory.se/
> >                                Cell: +46 (0)709 718 918
> >
> >