Re: GtkHtml 1, 2 and 1->2

[Ettore Perazzoli <ettore ximian com>]

On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 10:45, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>   I still don't understand this attitude toward maintaining gtkhtml
> even in the face of a number of problems when gtkhtml2 looks closer
> from providing all the needed features. 

It doesn't.

Most of the work in GtkHTML was not getting the rendering done -- it was
getting all the editing features done.

> The editing part is the main
> missing part, but contrary to gtkhtml gtkhtml2 was designed from the
> start on an internal representation targetting edition, and in a clean
> (i.e. with DOM semantic) way.

That doesn't really ease the implementation of all the user-level
features.  Plus I am not positive that the rendering engine in GtkHTML2
is optimized to fully handle progressive updates as needed by an editor.

>   I still remember the arguments from nearly 2 years ago when I asked
> you to switch gtkhtml to rely on the libxml core. 

Redoing that would have required substantial rewrites, and would have
not helped at all to get the editor done.  (No matter what you think.)

Anyways, I believe it is quite pointless to rehash this discussion now.

> Contrary to bonobo
> usage that was proper use of the toolkit, more precisely what the toolkit
> was built to do. 

I am not quite sure why Bonobo enters the picture here.  :-)

-- 
Ettore