Quote:

I can't speak for Gecko, but WebKit is efficient, minimal and open. There's a lot of code there, but no more than is necessary considering just how much stuff it supports.

I'm soon going to be calling for help with WebKit development and integration in to AROS. It sounds like you have some good ideas and I'd encourage you to get involved and make it into what you want it to be.

hi there,

well, whatever people decide to do with their money, they're free to do it. (actually I haven't paid for the AWeb-bounty. I was investigating if I could pick it up.)

somewhere above I've read about '...the bare minimum...' - hm, there's something to it. the 'bare minimum' comes close.

whatever happens to the AWeb-bounty - I'd like to see AWeb's best features continued somewhere. apart from this, I'm just trying to spread an idea.

actually, I don't know what exactly to say - yeah, it's vague mumbo-jumbo. it's about thinking with your brain, not with your eyes. it's about basically preferring eLinks to FireFox. about minimalism in software design and requirements. about open functionality and 'well, actually I don't really need all these colourful new built-in features'. it's about switch-off-go-out-and-play-computing, which AWeb enables me to by this tiny little "E" button in the lower right corner of a textarea. (no, it's not about trainspotting. ;))

anyway - to put it short:
I'm working on something. software tells more than 1000 words. ;)
It shall be a limited webbrowser, with basic HTTP networking features, and a simple rendering engine, both open to adjustments made by the user.

an example: I'm trying to implement a feature I call 'Zoom-into-DOM', where u can - well - zoom into the XML document object model and display just the elements at a given depth(range). something like firefox's "show selection source", just the other way round. (this would allow me to play Dark Orbit without the ads around it. :))

the approach is:
not 'everything-as-defined-by-the-author',
but 'what-the-user-wants-to-see-in-a-simple-yet-appealing-way'

I don't know how far I will get with this, but actually I'm quite surprised that I've already got ANYTHING on screen made from parsed XML code.


so - to sum this up from my side - whatever happens to the aweb-bounty, you've got my blessings. honestly, I've got no idea if WebKit or Gecko or ... are considered efficient or minimal or open systems - I just doubt it, and I'd prefer to have a choice, just in case. anyway, if just one person out there is (positively) thinking about my mumbo-jumbo browser talk or the vague idea of functionality and minimalism I'm trying to spread, I'd be a happier man. while I am quite a happy man, so don't let it bother you too much.

all the best,
regards, ro

p.s.: lol, it took me so long to write this, I'm gonna be logged out, now I wanna have Aweb's "E" down there, to save the text!

RoMancer: Sorry if I am harsh, however, I can't see exactly where's the point in keeping alive a fairly incompatible browser with nowadays standards. The web has slightly changed since AWeb was last updated, and AWeb won't render all those websites out there correctly. Maybe what you'd be glad to see, is really a new browser with the AWeb interface.

Second point, have you contributed to the AWeb bounty?

YES: well, your contribution to the bounty and your oppositon to merging it with the general browser one, will keep the AWeb bounty alive.

NO: please let people who actually PAID for it to decide. If all of them agree to move their money away, it's right to follow their will. You can do something to prevent this by financing the bounty you like so much...

@roMancer

What is good for you on A-Web ? It is probably not the way, websites are rendered ?
Or the way that websites that uses modern standards are not displayed ?

So what you like is the Browser itself.

Then everything should be fine for you.
Rob is not porting Firefox. He is porting the Webkit Enginge. The part of a browser that renders a Website. When A-Web is ever ported to AROS, it can use this engine too. It will still be A-Web as you know and like it, but it will display Websites a lot better.

An unobtrusive spell checker is a god send, at least when writing in a foreign language. I can't even find a reason why a text box shouldn't have a spell checker.

There's lots of good ideas on the other systems, should we avoid them altogether because we're proud of being on the ghetto? IMO we should use those who integrate the most with AROS experience, whatever that may be...

I'm still really not sure what you're saying. The only thing you've said that isn't vague handwavery is that you don't want a spellchecker? Or is it a more general you don't want anything more than the bare minimum?

I promise I'm not trying to be difficult. I really want to understand because I'm in the process of writing a browser for an Amiga-like system when all my experience is in Unix. I do take this sort of thing seriously but I can't work without hard details.

@Dammy:
see post#15, here's a copy: (...) the editor-gadget in a textarea's corner. the 'edit sourcecode' menu entry. the 'load link in background' functionality. the 'connections' window which lets you interrupt each single network connection if you like to. a javascript debugger (...)

(and, yeah, there's some degree of historical/name value in it. or would u drop the "A" in "AROS" because it's not 68k anymore? )


@ncafferkey:
"I don't believe in being different just for the sake of being different - only when it's better in some way"

agreed, massively. but one should keep one's mind open for the unknown/unusual/forgotten.


@all:
it's ok to consider my initial post wrong or silly - I don't have the technical knowledge (and don't want) to prove the opposite.

I just think it would be a bad sign to remove the AWeb bounty.

if AROS's browser will be a port of an open source browser, if AROS's cd-burning program acts like Nero or K3B, if AROS's email programs start checking my spelling and offer a thesaurus and/or I need to do serious research to disable these features, if AROS gets bloated with splash-screens, skins, and megabytes of background images, etc. pp. - then I don't need AROS, then I'd rather stay with linux, where I've got all of this without ANY effort, up and running right now.

it's an idea/ideal I'm talking about. don't get me wrong - of course I'd be happy running, say, firefox on AROS. but it's definitely not the only way to go. otherwise we could start the bounty to end all bounties: "create an AROS theme for linux"



regards,
ro


p.s.: hey, nothing personal, everybody. keep up the good work! I love AROS and everything about it. even ports of open source browsers.

Quote:

Exactly what features in AWeb Lite is so worth while? Or it is historical value and should be kept alive for "the name"?

Dammy

@roMancer
There are some things in the amiga system design that
are not "slightly smarter". Exposing internal structures
to normal programmers, relying on vararg parameters
being passed on the stack, all the BCPL stuff, comes to
my mind.

If I understand Robs plans correctly, there will
be Zune custom class. Free to be used by other browsers.

ciao

@roMancer:

I agree with you about keeping the Amiga feel (although I don't believe in being different just for the sake of being different - only when it's better in some way), but I don't think there's much point in investing a lot of effort in porting AWeb, only to have a browser that won't display most sites properly. And if you envisage a new AWeb with completely new code, it's not really AWeb you want but a new browser with some of AWeb's features. Traveller can be the new AWeb if you can get enough developers interested in implementing those features. Once a basic version of Traveller is out, maybe you should start a bounty to add those features, although to be honest I think a lot of them would be of limited interest to most people.