[RFC] Quo Vadis Dillo
Hi'all, Now that the last release of the patches seem to work (number 13 was less of a success...)... Where do we want to be tomorrow? What needs to be added/changed to improve Dillo? Should the tab/frame/etcetera + Indan's patch + ??? be forked into an 'experimental' version, somewhat like the Sylpheed MUA was forked into Sylpheed-claws? Talking about my patch, what does need improvement? Some ideas: - select contents of location bar/search field when they are focused (DONE, in next version) - make the 'search the web' popup disappear when popup_dialogs=NO, replace it with a non_popup version or use the location bar for search (like several other browsers do) - more key bindings (replacing current key handling where applicable) - remove compile options for tabs and frames, make tabs/frames standard? [ PDA/embedded developers: is this OK with you? ] - ??? Cheers//Frank -- WWWWW ________________________ ## o o\ / Frank de Lange \ }# \| / +46-734352015 \ \ `--| _/ <Hacker for Hire> \ `---' \ +31-640037120 / \ frank@unternet.org / `------------------------' [ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:05:17 +0100 Frank de Lange <frank@unternet.org> wrote:
Should the tab/frame/etcetera + Indan's patch + ??? be forked into an 'experimental' version, somewhat like the Sylpheed MUA was forked into Sylpheed-claws?
Personally i'd prefer if the patches were merged with Dillo but I wouldn't mind a forkish "Dillo-Claws" or such. Jorge?
Some ideas: - make the 'search the web' popup disappear when popup_dialogs=NO, replace it with a non_popup version or use the location bar for search (like several other browsers do)
Being able to use the location-bar (or preferably a separate search-bar) would be really neato. It's #1 on my wish-list, anyways. Keep up the good work. - Victor
How about horizontal/vertical split of a tab. One use for it is being able to compare side by side different parts of the same document. Eythan
Eythan Weg wrote:
How about horizontal/vertical split of a tab. One use for it is being able to compare side by side different parts of the same document.
No, that sounds like something which can easily be achieved using a frameset. No need for special code in Dillo for that... <frameset cols="*,*"> <frame src="doc1.html"> <frame src="doc2.html"> </frameset> Make a form which feeds two urls to a frameset page like that. Presto, two documents side by side. Cheers//Frank -- WWWWW ________________________ ## o o\ / Frank de Lange \ }# \| / +46-734352015 \ \ `--| _/ <Hacker for Hire> \ `---' \ +31-640037120 / \ frank@unternet.org / `------------------------' [ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
Frank de Lange writes:
Eythan Weg wrote:
How about horizontal/vertical split of a tab. One use for it is being able to compare side by side different parts of the same document.
No, that sounds like something which can easily be achieved using a frameset. No need for special code in Dillo for that...
<frameset cols="*,*"> <frame src="doc1.html"> <frame src="doc2.html"> </frameset>
Make a form which feeds two urls to a frameset page like that. Presto, two documents side by side.
Yes, but... inconvenient and besides it blends the user with the page designer. Consider, perhaps, an implementation of your suggestion done on the fly. For now I prefer to open a second dillo's window when such a need arises.
Cheers//Frank
Sincerely, Eythan
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:18:40 -0500, Eythan Weg <weg@indiscrete.org> wrote:
Frank de Lange writes:
Make a form which feeds two urls to a frameset page like that. Presto, two documents side by side. Yes, but... inconvenient and besides it blends the user with the page designer. Consider, perhaps,
yes, but dont forget that dillo is suppose to be light and fast... if we start adding this kind of small things that most users will not use, we will start getting mozilla size 8) higuita -- Naturally the common people don't want war... but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country. -- Hermann Goering, Nazi and war criminal, 1883-1946
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:36:34 -0500 Eythan Weg <weg@indiscrete.org> wrote:
How about horizontal/vertical split of a tab. One use for it is being able to compare side by side different parts of the same document.
at the point where you find that you also want you text editor side-by-side with dillo to edit your page and consider integrating one with dillo, you should notice that this is probably the wrong level to solve the problem at... such things seem less like a feature to add into a specific application, (ands to be repeated in each new application!) but ask for a more more general system, for example a windowmanager feature. <offtopic><plug> a windowmanager that implements such features is ion: http://modeemi.cs.tut.fi/~tuomov/ion/ while it's different managment models probably take time to get used to, it's perfect for such tasks. i made screenshots of a split dillo example: http://users.auriga.wearlab.de/~r00t/sidebyside-1.png http://users.auriga.wearlab.de/~r00t/sidebyside-2.png </plug></offtopic>
Eythan
Greetings, Thorben
* Frank de Lange <frank@unternet.org> [11-11-03 09:09]:
Now that the last release of the patches seem to work (number 13 was less of a success...)...
I successfully applied #14 to SuSE 8.1 and have found no faults. I am very pleased with the functionality, tabs & keybindings.
Where do we want to be tomorrow?
What needs to be added/changed to improve Dillo?
Should the tab/frame/etcetera + Indan's patch + ??? be forked into an 'experimental' version, somewhat like the Sylpheed MUA was forked into Sylpheed-claws?
I was unable to apply Indan's https patch to the 11-10.cvs, pat@wahoo:/dillo.cvs.1110> patch -p1 <dillo-ssl.diff patching file configure.in Hunk #1 succeeded at 26 with fuzz 2 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 177 (offset 8 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 225 (offset 22 lines). patching file src/IO/IO.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 48 with fuzz 2. Hunk #2 succeeded at 88 (offset 18 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 276 (offset 18 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 402 (offset 18 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 451 (offset 21 lines). Hunk #6 succeeded at 468 (offset 21 lines). Hunk #7 succeeded at 476 (offset 21 lines). Hunk #8 succeeded at 506 (offset 21 lines). Hunk #9 succeeded at 578 (offset 22 lines). Hunk #10 FAILED at 592. Hunk #11 succeeded at 746 (offset 24 lines). 1 out of 11 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/IO/IO.c.rej patching file src/IO/IO.h Hunk #1 FAILED at 46. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/IO/IO.h.rej patching file src/IO/Url.c patching file src/IO/http.c Hunk #2 FAILED at 219. Hunk #3 succeeded at 317 with fuzz 2 (offset 3 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 406 (offset 5 lines). 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/IO/http.c.rej patching file src/capi.c Hunk #1 FAILED at 255. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/capi.c.rej rej files available on request. It would be nice if you included Indan's https patch with your's. INFO ONLY: I have compiled an rpm of 11-10.cvs with the tabs patch which is ~240K. Also available on request. tks for your efforts, -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org
I was unable to apply Indan's https patch to the 11-10.cvs,
Known "problem", see my other mail for more info.
It would be nice if you included Indan's https patch with your's.
My patch is very young and I'm not happy with it yet, but it looks like I need to update it, impatient people. :) Greetings, Indan
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:05:17PM +0100, Frank de Lange wrote:
Talking about my patch, what does need improvement? Some ideas: - select contents of location bar/search field when they are focused (DONE, in next version)
Heh, I made that change myself about six months ago.
- make the 'search the web' popup disappear when popup_dialogs=NO, replace it with a non_popup version or use the location bar for search (like several other browsers do)
Using the location bar is nice, but I think the Mozilla Firebird approach presents a more consistent interface. It has a separate (small) search box to the right of the location bar. Ctrl-L takes you to the location bar, Ctrl-K takes you to the search bar.
- more key bindings (replacing current key handling where applicable) - remove compile options for tabs and frames, make tabs/frames standard? [ PDA/embedded developers: is this OK with you? ] - ???
- i-search support within the "View Source" window would be helpful. Paul
Paul Pelzl wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:05:17PM +0100, Frank de Lange wrote:
Talking about my patch, what does need improvement? Some ideas: - select contents of location bar/search field when they are focused (DONE, in next version)
Heh, I made that change myself about six months ago.
Hm, you should have shared your patch then, ey? I use hooks to grab-focus (->select all) and focus-out-event (->deselect all). What was your solution?
Using the location bar is nice, but I think the Mozilla Firebird approach presents a more consistent interface. It has a separate (small) search box to the right of the location bar. Ctrl-L takes you to the location bar, Ctrl-K takes you to the search bar.
I use Phoenixbird as well (for those few pages which Dillo does not handle good enough). I think the search bar has both advantages and disadvantages. Advantage is that is is a more consistent user interface, disadvantage is that it is small. I'm also not that keen on the combination of page and web search in one dialog: even though they are both 'search' functions, they do conceptually different things. One leads to the loading of a new page, the other does not. I prefer to have the page-loading stuff (locbar, maybe web search bar) separate from non-page-loading stuff. I also think that having a special search bar just for web search is a bit of a waste of screen real estate. The location bar is big enough for even complex search terms, it is always there (will make it popup when pressing CTRL-L in full-screen mode for next patch, just like the search/status bar does now when popup_dialogs=NO). So, I'm not that sure about Firebird's search box. Anyone care to comment on this?
- more key bindings (replacing current key handling where applicable) - remove compile options for tabs and frames, make tabs/frames standard? [ PDA/embedded developers: is this OK with you? ] - ???
- i-search support within the "View Source" window would be helpful.
The whole 'View Source' window needs an overhaul. Best thing to do would be to implement a (sane, no 'notepad popup spam' like Microsoft products manage to produce) version of the 'view-source' protocol, so source is viewed in a normal window/tab/frame/... That way you get all facilities, for 'free'. This can be implemented in many ways, as a plugin (but I'm not that keen on plugins as they are implemented now...), in the current code, as a dlopen() library (not there yet...), etc. Cheers//Frank -- WWWWW ________________________ ## o o\ / Frank de Lange \ }# \| / +46-734352015 \ \ `--| _/ <Hacker for Hire> \ `---' \ +31-640037120 / \ frank@unternet.org / `------------------------' [ "Omnis enim res, quae dando non deficit, dum habetur et non datur, nondum habetur, quomodo habenda est." ]
So, I'm not that sure about Firebird's search box. Anyone care to comment on this?
I use Firebird too often, and I have that little extra search box. It's small, it's has annoying behaviour, I never use it. Only feature I would like to have that is search related, is that ctrl+g searches for the same string again, no matter in what way you made the first search. Greetings, Indan
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 08:57:05AM +0100, Frank de Lange wrote:
Talking about my patch, what does need improvement? Some ideas: - select contents of location bar/search field when they are focused (DONE, in next version)
Heh, I made that change myself about six months ago.
Hm, you should have shared your patch then, ey? I use hooks to grab-focus (->select all) and focus-out-event (->deselect all). What was your solution?
My solution was less comprehensive. I just added a line in a_Interface_open_dialog, which does everything I want since I have popup_dialogs=NO.
- more key bindings (replacing current key handling where applicable) - remove compile options for tabs and frames, make tabs/frames standard? [ PDA/embedded developers: is this OK with you? ] - ???
- i-search support within the "View Source" window would be helpful.
The whole 'View Source' window needs an overhaul. Best thing to do would be to implement a (sane, no 'notepad popup spam' like Microsoft products manage to produce) version of the 'view-source' protocol, so source is viewed in a normal window/tab/frame/... That way you get all facilities, for 'free'.
Agreed, this is really the way to handle it. Paul
participants (8)
-
Eythan Weg -
Frank de Lange -
higuita -
Indan Zupancic -
Patrick Shanahan -
Paul Pelzl -
Thorben Thuermer -
Victor Sahlstedt