- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

Re: [Dillo-dev] Re: reason for Dillo's existence

by Diego Sáenz

I have a Pentium 150Mhz with 16Mb of RAM. Dillo is the only graphic browser i can use well. This is enought to me. By the things i have read in the dillo list it will suport CSS and https(there is a unoficial patch for this) Diego. El Thu, 08 May 2003 17:26:15 +0300 Philippe Laporte <philippe.laporte(a)nokia.com> escribio: ext Jamin W. Collins wrote: >On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 12:48:02PM +0300, Philippe Laporte wrote: > > > >>This is not the argument I'm looking for since obviously reduced >>functionality implies reduced complexity implies quite hopefully >>increased reliability. >> >>I'm not trying to be nasty here. So it's not the goal of dillo to be >>compliant with web content? >> >> > >Have you read the Dillo home page? Particularly: > > http://dillo.auriga.wearlab.de/funding/ > >This site outlines much of Dillo's "reason for being". Specifically: > > Keeping dillo up to date with the dynamic underlying technologies to > meet the main objectives, becomes the long term goal. > >I believe that should answer your question. > > I read that stuff but still am not clear about why it exists if its goal is to compete with Konqueror. It's obvious that you should have Konqueror and Mozilla, but it's not obvious that you should have dillo and Konqueror. Is it Dillo's goal to support CSS and Javascript? How about https? Do Dillo people believe you can call something a web browser if it does not have support for these? If yes, then it is targeted for a different, limited usage. What would you say is the distinctive point between Dillo and Khtml/Konqueror? It is not true that C code is faster than C++ Thanks, Philippe

May 8, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] Re: reason for Dillo's existence

by Philippe Laporte

ext Jamin W. Collins wrote: >On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 12:48:02PM +0300, Philippe Laporte wrote: > > > >>This is not the argument I'm looking for since obviously reduced >>functionality implies reduced complexity implies quite hopefully >>increased reliability. >> >>I'm not trying to be nasty here. So it's not the goal of dillo to be >>compliant with web content? >> >> > >Have you read the Dillo home page? Particularly: > > http://dillo.auriga.wearlab.de/funding/ > >This site outlines much of Dillo's "reason for being". Specifically: > > Keeping dillo up to date with the dynamic underlying technologies to > meet the main objectives, becomes the long term goal. > >I believe that should answer your question. > > I read that stuff but still am not clear about why it exists if its goal is to compete with Konqueror. It's obvious that you should have Konqueror and Mozilla, but it's not obvious that you should have dillo and Konqueror. Is it Dillo's goal to support CSS and Javascript? How about https? Do Dillo people believe you can call something a web browser if it does not have support for these? If yes, then it is targeted for a different, limited usage. What would you say is the distinctive point between Dillo and Khtml/Konqueror? It is not true that C code is faster than C++ Thanks, Philippe

May 8, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] Re: reason for Dillo's existence

by Jamin W. Collins

On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 12:48:02PM +0300, Philippe Laporte wrote: > This is not the argument I'm looking for since obviously reduced > functionality implies reduced complexity implies quite hopefully > increased reliability. > > I'm not trying to be nasty here. So it's not the goal of dillo to be > compliant with web content? Have you read the Dillo home page? Particularly: http://dillo.auriga.wearlab.de/funding/ This site outlines much of Dillo's "reason for being". Specifically: Keeping dillo up to date with the dynamic underlying technologies to meet the main objectives, becomes the long term goal. I believe that should answer your question. -- Jamin W. Collins This is the typical unix way of doing things: you string together lots of very specific tools to accomplish larger tasks. -- Vineet Kumar

May 8, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] Re: reason for Dillo's existence

by Philippe Laporte

ext Geek wrote: >> Hi, >> Would a Konqueror(Khtml) ported to GTK render dillo irrelevant, or >> is there really a spot out there for browsers with conformance to >> subsets of widely used web standards? >> >> I mean, why was dillo ever started? Would it have been started if KHTML >> had been ported to GTK at the time? >> >> Thaks, >> Philippe >> >> > >I'm glad it DOES exist - it is the only pure, 100% stable browser on many a >system and it's great for webmasters like me that want to check their X/HTML >code for "Any-browser" compatibility. > >Oh yeah, the speed thing is fantastic! Since loading 1300 fonts in my machine, >Opera went from firing up in six seconds to taking 23 seconds to load. Dillo >starts in 0.78 seconds! ;-) > >-- >Gregg > > This is not the argument I'm looking for since obviously reduced functionality implies reduced complexity implies quite hopefully increased reliability. I'm not trying to be nasty here. So it's not the goal of dillo to be compliant with web content? Thanks, Philippe

May 8, 2003

Re: reason for Dillo's existence

by Geek

> Hi, > Would a Konqueror(Khtml) ported to GTK render dillo irrelevant, or > is there really a spot out there for browsers with conformance to > subsets of widely used web standards? > > I mean, why was dillo ever started? Would it have been started if KHTML > had been ported to GTK at the time? > > Thaks, > Philippe I'm glad it DOES exist - it is the only pure, 100% stable browser on many a system and it's great for webmasters like me that want to check their X/HTML code for "Any-browser" compatibility. Oh yeah, the speed thing is fantastic! Since loading 1300 fonts in my machine, Opera went from firing up in six seconds to taking 23 seconds to load. Dillo starts in 0.78 seconds! ;-) -- Gregg

May 8, 2003

reason for dillo's existence

by Philippe Laporte

Hi, Would a Konqueror(Khtml) ported to GTK render dillo irrelevant, or is there really a spot out there for browsers with conformance to subsets of widely used web standards? I mean, why was dillo ever started? Would it have been started if KHTML had been ported to GTK at the time? Thaks, Philippe

May 7, 2003

Broken link on your website

by Connie Davis

There appears to be a problem on this page: http://www.wearlab.de/DOCS/links_ausgabe_en.php When we click on your link to: http://www.charmed.com/charmit we get the error: 404 File not found We last examined your page on Tue May 06, 2003 at 10:12:12 PM EDT. If it has not been updated since then, the link is most likely broken. We discovered this error during our normal course of website content checking for one of our search engine clients. If you would like to receive notifications like this in the future if we find pages unavailable, click here: http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/clickthrough.jsp?I5s57j5j5i5i5i5o… Click here to learn more about us: http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/clickthrough.jsp?I5s57j5j5i5i5i5o… Sincerely, Connie Davis InternetSeer.com http://www.internetseer.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Your email address was found during a prior visit to your website on 05-06-2003. The error listed above was verified from both of our indexing servers in Philadelphia, Pa. and Los Angeles, Ca. This error could have been caused by any number of events, including connectivity problems on our part and/or connectivity problems in the Internet as we tried to reach your site. This error should not be construed as a guaranteed problem on the part of your website or hosting company since there are never any guaranteed connection routes on the Internet. If would like to be excluded from any potential future contact, click here: http://scclick.internetseer.com/sitecheck/cancel.jsp?VSSC7w59VMW5tIXxTQ61f5… ##dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de## SRC=58

May 7, 2003

Re:

by zeroday

May 7, 2003

Re:

by zeroday

May 7, 2003

Re: [Dillo-dev] GUI library changing

by Isaque Galdino de Araujo

Ok, but, could you point me what are the main code/files need to make dillo works? On Fri, 2 May 2003 20:20:59 +0200 Sebastian Geerken <s.geerken(a)ping.de> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, Isaque Galdino wrote: > > I would like to know how hard would be changing the GUI > > library. I would like to change GTK+ stuff by FLTK and run > > dillo on my PDA that uses mainly FLTK library. > > Quite hard, I would not recommend it. Dillo is tightly bound to Gtk+, > uses its features, and there are some specific widgets (DwGtk*) > derived from GtkWidget, which are probably difficult to port. > > Sebastian > > _______________________________________________ > Dillo-dev mailing list > Dillo-dev(a)lists.auriga.wearlab.de > http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev -- Isaque Galdino de Araujo C/C++/Java http://isaque.sites.uol.com.br Linux User #274776 since 1997 Slackware User so far

May 6, 2003