On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 09:04 +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote: > One could argue the following: > > - The native UI building technology for Gecko is XUL > - The native UI building technology for WebKit-GTK+ is GTK+ > - Having one (just one) web content engine in[1] the platform is a must > - What Alp said, WebKit-GTK+ is a totally GNOME/GTK+-committed > project[2] while Mozilla tends to have its own[3] direction in > development. This is quite fine I think, but it also means that > WebKit-GTK+ will tend to have more (possibilities for) integration > with the rest of the stack. > - Having a default engine should not scare away people caring about > which engine they use if it happens to be the other one. > - Epiphany made the jump on the desktop side, I wouldn't be > surprised if devhelp and yelp would follow the lead (even if there > hasn't been decisions on that, haven't noticed any at least). It would > be good to be consistent in this front. > > One positive note is that I don't think performance will have > significant differences after the crazy browser optimization race is > over (browser developers, please please continue to try to prove me > wrong! ;). > > So taking WebKit-GTK+ as the default web content engine for GNOME > Mobile makes sense due to the release cycle, API, technology and > design compatibility with GNOME, just like it made sense for Epiphany > to do so. Gecko will always be available to those who want it, like in > the case of distros that are defaulting to Firefox. Yeah, that's pretty much exactly my thoughts on this. Ross -- OpenedHand Ltd. Unit R Homesdale Business Center / 216-218 Homesdale Road / Bromley / BR1 2QZ / UK Tel: +44 (0)20 8819 6559 Expert Open Source For Consumer Devices - http://o-hand.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part