March 2010 - Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

[jeffdewe@gmail.com: Dillo]

by andreas＠kemnade.info

Hi, just one more practical explanation of the advances the more ressource friendly fltk2 has. BTW: fltk2 does not necessarily depend on GL. Imagine you have a device with limited ressources. Running a browser bigger than dillo might be possible. Perhaps even a bigger loading time might be ok in some situations. For example if you hve only gprs to connect to the internet, then loading of many pages takes ages anyway. But in case of multitasking there is really a harder limit. If you have multiple applications running which are a bit bigger, then you really have problems when you start a fat browser. Here is an example: Just some days after I got my freerunner I started a long bicycle trip and had not find time to install dillo. On one of the first evenings I visited one or two pages. That was not so nice but bearable with the default browser really because I was not surfing very much (of course having dillo is much better). Some days later, I was abroad and I found one wifi hotspot. I had more applications open (at least my mapping program (with a hotspot list loaded) Starting the default browser has frozen the system. That is completely unbearable. In that situation having a browser with a lower ressource usage is essential. Greetings Andreas Kemnade

March 31, 2010

[jeffdewe@gmail.com: Dillo]

by jcid＠dillo.org

-- Cheers Jorge.-

March 31, 2010

patch: implement white-space: pre-wrap for vsource

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:02:16AM +0000, corvid wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 06:00:26AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > > Just a thought I had. The web is filled with horrible generated html > > > > with lines a thousand characters long. With this (and parse_embedded_css), > > > > those lines become more tolerable. > > > > > > Very nice! > > > > +1 > > > > I really dislike when emails with paragraphs in one line get > > under PRE. If this fixes that, I'm all for it! :) > > > > > > I would commit it in two pieces, of course. > > > > > > Please go ahead - at least for the CSS / dw part. I don't know > > > whether it's ok to use it for source view. > > > > AFAIS, there's no problem for source view. > > Committed the CSS/dw part. > > For vsource, I have no opinion on whether to use my original solution > or to add an id like Johannes mentioned. As Jorge is also ok with it, I'd say make it the default for source view. Additionally I will add the id, for customization in style.css.

March 31, 2010

patch: white-space: pre-line as well

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I don't know whether it's of much use, exactly, but while I was in the conceptual area...

March 31, 2010

patch: implement white-space: pre-wrap for vsource

by corvid＠lavabit.com

Jorge wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 06:00:26AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Just a thought I had. The web is filled with horrible generated html > > > with lines a thousand characters long. With this (and parse_embedded_css), > > > those lines become more tolerable. > > > > Very nice! > > +1 > > I really dislike when emails with paragraphs in one line get > under PRE. If this fixes that, I'm all for it! :) > > > > I would commit it in two pieces, of course. > > > > Please go ahead - at least for the CSS / dw part. I don't know > > whether it's ok to use it for source view. > > AFAIS, there's no problem for source view. Committed the CSS/dw part. For vsource, I have no opinion on whether to use my original solution or to add an id like Johannes mentioned.

March 31, 2010

HTML 2.0 DTDs

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 08:37:16PM +0000, corvid wrote: > I just mistyped an address on our site, got a 404, and noticed that > I get an HTML bug msg about the DTD. > > The 404 page has: > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> > > Html_parse_doctype has: > > static const char HTML20 [] = "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN"; > > RFC 1866 has: > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Level 2//EN"> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Level 1//EN"> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Strict//EN"> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Strict Level 1//EN"> > > So I would rather strncmp for "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0". +1 -- Cheers Jorge.-

March 31, 2010

patch: implement white-space: pre-wrap for vsource

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 06:00:26AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > Just a thought I had. The web is filled with horrible generated html > > with lines a thousand characters long. With this (and parse_embedded_css), > > those lines become more tolerable. > > Very nice! +1 I really dislike when emails with paragraphs in one line get under PRE. If this fixes that, I'm all for it! :) > > I would commit it in two pieces, of course. > > Please go ahead - at least for the CSS / dw part. I don't know > whether it's ok to use it for source view. AFAIS, there's no problem for source view. -- Cheers Jorge.-

March 31, 2010

Re: experiment feedback

by spell_gooder_now＠spellingbeewinnars.org

Hi Alan I had actually read quite a bit about seed and I had downloaded some sample code and played with it in the past. However your idea never occurred to me. I think it would be a fantastic idea to make the JavaScript within the layout engine talk to the "enclosing" GUI that is also written in JavaScript. I read through your blog, thanks for the link and your writings. I have been going around in circles for an amount of time I am too ashamed to confess. I have decided to write the back end and post pone the front end till I sort this out in my head. I would however still like to be a part of any project you might start related to this. I hope this won't come across the wrong way, I really like Dillo but I am wondering what is it's main niche it is planning to fill? Certainly it is fast and certainly it is small but is the target audience just people looking for a general purpose browser? Would it's speed and small size not make it ideal for being embedded in another application? Would this not be something that Gecko and Webkit cannot easily offer? I only have limited resources and time but I bet a corporate sponsor might fund this. Alan, I hope your studying goes well, sounds like someone else is sleep deprived too-Patrick

March 31, 2010

patch: implement white-space: pre-wrap for vsource

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 08:12:34PM +0000, corvid wrote: > Johannes wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 06:00:26AM +0000, corvid wrote: > > > Just a thought I had. The web is filled with horrible generated html > > > with lines a thousand characters long. With this (and parse_embedded_css), > > > those lines become more tolerable. > > > > Very nice! > > > > > > > > I would commit it in two pieces, of course. > > > > Please go ahead - at least for the CSS / dw part. I don't know > > whether it's ok to use it for source view. > > I've read that it's in CSS 2.1 and 3, but not 1 or 2. > 2 is a "recommendation", but 2.1 is a "candidate recommendation". > > Are we aiming more in the direction of 2 or 2.1 (or their intersection)? I think we should go with 2.1. 2.1 fixes some shortcomings of 2, and 3 is still experimental - as far as I know.

March 30, 2010

HTML 2.0 DTDs

by corvid＠lavabit.com

I just mistyped an address on our site, got a 404, and noticed that I get an HTML bug msg about the DTD. The 404 page has: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> Html_parse_doctype has: static const char HTML20 [] = "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN"; RFC 1866 has: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Level 2//EN"> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Level 1//EN"> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Strict//EN"> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0 Strict Level 1//EN"> So I would rather strncmp for "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0".

March 30, 2010