Re: Webkit2 porting

[Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>]

On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 21:17 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 14:44 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Jim Nelson <jim yorba org> wrote:
> >
> > > It would be great if the DOM was available via WebKitGTK and the local
> > > library did the IPC for us, but I've been told that that's not going
> > > to happen.  The DOM is a huge API and I can't blame them for that.  I
> > > do wish the separate process model was an optional run mode because,
> > > as I said, I don't see a lot of benefits moving to it for Geary.
> I think Geary is really the worst-case scenario here: a fairly large
> application that performs significant DOM manipulations in response to
> UI events, already written with the WebKit1 API. For apps that are just
> displaying web pages (everything not geary?) with no such compatibility
> concerns, porting should be relatively easy.

Geary might be worst-case, but Yelp is non-trivial. It does some DOM
manipulation, and the whole way it pushes content to WebKit has to be
changed.

Carlos did a ton of patches on Yelp, more recently updated by Marcos,
but I haven't had time to fully test them. A lot of corner cases could
blow up when you change that bit of code.

Honestly, the WebKit1 API seemed on the whole nicer to work with for any
application that isn't a web browser. What about Empathy? A chat display
strikes me as something that's more about data insertions than showing
some URI.

--
Shaun