On Fri, 2005-24-06 at 16:05 -0400, Britt Selvitelle wrote: > One thing I'd like to see in epiphany is javascript bindings. It just > makes sense to be able to develop for the browser in the same language > you use to develop for the web. I disagree: a GNOME application is not a web page. My view is that Firefox uses Javascript for extensions because Netscape decided 7 years ago to blur the boundaries between web browsers and web pages -- a decision it later reversed, bringing about Firefox. The main advantage of Javascript bindings is that web developers can become extension writers (making extensions like "web developer toolbar" totally obvious). The main advantage of Python bindings is that they're easy. Javascript isn't particularly easy to learn, and making a Firefox extension isn't trivial either (the chrome and XUL files and stuff...). On the other hand, Python is easy to learn, and making an Epiphany extension is trivial (with 10 lines of code and an XML file you can make a useful extension). Adam
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part