- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

Re: Dillo 2.1 questions

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 02:33:51PM +0200, Donjan Rodic wrote: > Hello Jorge > > First off, Dillo 2.1 is awesome. It got exactly the features I hoped for Good! > and isn't noticably more resource hungry. In fact it has half the memory footprint of the dillo1 series. http://www.dillo.org/memory.html > Too bad it doesn't support column layouts in CSS yet... can we expect > this in the next release? I hope! The column layout problem is mainly a lack of implementation of floating elements in the textblock. it is one of the top priorities for the next release (if not the topmost). We'll work on it and try to fix it. We're yet to find out how much work it will be. > One thing I can't figure out are the available keybinding commands. For > example, how would I call "scroll-one-screen-up", which I'd like to bind > to <Shift>Space. Similar to how Space scrolls one screen down. > Also "open-link-in-new-tab" to <Ctrl>"left-mouse-click"... > I couldn't find any documentation on such commands, except for the keys > listed in .dillo/keysrc. You should have an installation-wide keysrc file along with dillorc. If not, just read http://www.dillo.org/keysrc. AFAIS, we haven't included that keybinding, but will probably exist in the source repository soon. Maybe: coarse-scroll-down, coarse-scroll-up, fine-scroll-down, fine-scroll-up > Another topic: is the adblock.txt in the .dillo folder supposed to work? > Is there any recent documentation on this? No, AFAIK it isn't in the release. I'd really like to have it in the next release though. -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 23, 2009

css font-size and nested tables

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 05:13:29PM +0300, Tomas R wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:11 +0200 > Johannes Hofmann <Johannes.Hofmann(a)gmx.de> wrote: > > > Oh well. Just found this here: > > > > http://developer.mozilla.org/En/Fixing_Table_Inheritance_in_Quirks_Mode > > > > Not sure whether I want to do anything about it. > > Adding quirks in browsers just causes web developers to add quirks to > > fix them and so on... > > > > For now, as a workaround font_min_size could be set to 10-12 by > default (anything lower than 10 is unreadable), but not sure how this > will effect some websites, where text is intentionally hidden by > setting its size to negative or very low value. To simulate the behaviour of other browsers, you can add table, caption {font-size: medium} to your ~/.dillo/style.css for now. Maybe we should add this to the FAQ? Cheers, Johannes

June 23, 2009

css font-size and nested tables

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:37:11PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > Oh well. Just found this here: > > http://developer.mozilla.org/En/Fixing_Table_Inheritance_in_Quirks_Mode > > Not sure whether I want to do anything about it. > Adding quirks in browsers just causes web developers to add quirks to > fix them and so on... Well, it's a quirk... and we already have the font_min_size to tackle the problem. I'd prefer to focus our scarce development time into issues deemed high priority (e.g. the column rendering in textblock). -- Cheers Jorge.-

June 23, 2009

dillo 2.1

by sandshrew＠gmail.com

One more thing that I forgot to mention in the first message is text wrapping in textareas. By default unlike all the popular browsers dillo does not wrap text in textareas. Actually discussion about this was started in this mailing list some time ago but unexpectedly finished after corvid pointed out that according to the standards it's up to the browser to decide whether to wrap text or not. Maybe, if someone thinks it's better when text is not wrapped, this could be made optional? Would it be easy to implement this setting with fltk?

June 23, 2009

css font-size and nested tables

by sandshrew＠gmail.com

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:37:11 +0200 Johannes Hofmann <Johannes.Hofmann(a)gmx.de> wrote: > Oh well. Just found this here: > > http://developer.mozilla.org/En/Fixing_Table_Inheritance_in_Quirks_Mode > > Not sure whether I want to do anything about it. > Adding quirks in browsers just causes web developers to add quirks to > fix them and so on... > For now, as a workaround font_min_size could be set to 10-12 by default (anything lower than 10 is unreadable), but not sure how this will effect some websites, where text is intentionally hidden by setting its size to negative or very low value.

June 23, 2009

css font-size and nested tables

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

Oh well. Just found this here: http://developer.mozilla.org/En/Fixing_Table_Inheritance_in_Quirks_Mode Not sure whether I want to do anything about it. Adding quirks in browsers just causes web developers to add quirks to fix them and so on... Cheers, Johannes On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:16:05PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote: > Hi, > > trying to find the reason for the tiny fonts in gmail, I found the > following: > > <html> > <head> > <style type="text/css"> > td {font-family: arial; font-size:50%} > </style> > </head> > <body> > > <table> > <tr> <td> foo bar </td> </tr> > <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>foo bar</td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> > </table> > > </body> > </html> > > is rendered with the same font size in both lines in firefox, > konqueror, and opera. > Can someone enlighten me why the nested <td> does not decrease the > font size again in the second line? > > If I change the CSS to act on <table> instead of <td> it works as > expected. > > Cheers, > Johannes > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)dillo.org > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev

June 23, 2009

css font-size and nested tables

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

Hi, trying to find the reason for the tiny fonts in gmail, I found the following: <html> <head> <style type="text/css"> td {font-family: arial; font-size:50%} </style> </head> <body> <table> <tr> <td> foo bar </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td>foo bar</td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> </table> </body> </html> is rendered with the same font size in both lines in firefox, konqueror, and opera. Can someone enlighten me why the nested <td> does not decrease the font size again in the second line? If I change the CSS to act on <table> instead of <td> it works as expected. Cheers, Johannes

June 23, 2009

dillo 2.1]

by sandshrew＠gmail.com

Accidentally sent to corvid only. Forwarding to dillo-dev. > > > It seems whoever designed the new website theme has no idea what > > > READABILITY means... It looks like someone just used some stupid online > > > color picker, which just picks some similar colors to the one user > > > chooses. The old website looked MUCH MUCH better. Imho, it's a > > > regression... > > > > Hm I like the new design, but I agree that readability might be a problem. > > Let's see what other say. > > I still find visited text to be hard to read, but I know I should > break down and get a new display... > I wonder if you are the only dillo user with old display... BTW, I am using pretty new LCD display and still find it hard to read.

June 22, 2009

dillo 2.1

by Johannes.Hofmann＠gmx.de

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:49:05PM +0300, Tomas Rimkus wrote: > > > UI > > > 1) Positioning the tab close button on the top RIGHT corner of the > > > browser isn't a good thing because: > > > a) The distance between the most commonly used buttons and the tab > > > close button is pretty big (especially when widescreen monitors are > > > pretty common nowadays); > > > b) It only allows closing the active tab; > > > I think it would be much better if all tabs had close buttons or at > > > least the button was placed near the last tab. > > > > Agreed. Patch welcome :) > > > > It seems this requires patching fltk -> http://www.mail-archive.com/fltk@easysw.com/msg05658.html This just means, that fltk does not support that out of the box. It would certainly be possible to implement it in dillo by overriding the default fltk tab drawing code. Cheers, Johannes

June 22, 2009

dillo 2.1

by sandshrew＠gmail.com

> > UI > > 1) Positioning the tab close button on the top RIGHT corner of the > > browser isn't a good thing because: > > a) The distance between the most commonly used buttons and the tab > > close button is pretty big (especially when widescreen monitors are > > pretty common nowadays); > > b) It only allows closing the active tab; > > I think it would be much better if all tabs had close buttons or at > > least the button was placed near the last tab. > > Agreed. Patch welcome :) > It seems this requires patching fltk -> http://www.mail-archive.com/fltk@easysw.com/msg05658.html

June 22, 2009