Re: webkit in konqueror!

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by Erunno on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @06:09

Since KHTML is part of kdelibs it will have to be supported until KDE 5 as far as I understand it. And the next major revision is years away so it's probably in the best interest of KDE to stay on the good side with the KHTML developers since their loss might not be easily replaced judging by the complexity of the KHTML codebase.

Related Links

·   Articles on Developer
·   Also by Erunno
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by Hank Miller on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @06:59

Not really, if khtml development really dies, it wouldn't be that hard to make the kthml API just wrap the webkit API (which we get for free from QT). There would be some extra overhead to doing it this way, but not much - you can already choose webkit or khtml, so most of the time this wouldn't even be used as we can make the default webkit.

What would be really interesting is to separate khtml out (like webkit was once separated from khtml), and get some of the gnome guys working on webkit into khtml. I'm not sure if this is possible, but it would be really interesting. If Apple decides to close up webkit just a little bit (I'm not sure if they can anymore) khtml might be the way to go. Perhaps we can even make khtml an alternative plugin for safari browsers.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by Erunno on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @07:07

I stand corrected then. But 'm curious if such a wrapper wouldn't break ABI compatability which is also guaranteed until KDE 5. I confess that my C++ knowledge is medicore at best when it comes to compiler voodoo.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by SadEagle on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @07:19

The QtWebKit API is only a tiny portion of what KHTML provides. And if it weren't, what makes you think anyone would do it? In fact, if people were actually willing to do work, instead of spreading FUD, you might have seen a libkhtml based on WebCore already.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by Anon on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @07:36

" In fact, if people were actually willing to do work, instead of spreading FUD, you might have seen a libkhtml based on WebCore already."

Is this still possible in 4.x while maintaining BC? What kind of skill level would be required for someone interested, and roughly how much work would you say it was?

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by SadEagle on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @07:38

For most classes, BC is trivial, for things like KHTMLPart it's not, but doable. The hard part, and the incredible tricky kind of work, is making it integrate properly. That means, for example, that a web page should still be able to embed, and script KMPlayer, that all the settings are followed, etc, that the KIO and KParts hooks are still in there, etc.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by ac on Tuesday 11/Mar/2008, @12:41

Perhaps it is even an advantage of WebKitQt that it does not use KIO with its excessive reliance on DBus-based IPC. I've got a notion that Konqueror feels exspecially sluggish (in comparison to other browsers) when it has initiated a lot of KIO Slaves.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by SadEagle on Tuesday 11/Mar/2008, @13:15

KIO doesn't use DBus for communications with an I/O slave.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by ac on Wednesday 12/Mar/2008, @09:03

Yes, in this case "socket-based IPC" would be more accurate. Nevertheless, if Konqueror's sluggish behavior on some sites is not caused by the rendering engine but by KIO, the KDE bindings of WebKit you are proposing (as opposed to pure Qt bindings in QtWebKit) would not be of much help.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: webkit in konqueror!
by Erunno on Monday 10/Mar/2008, @07:03

I stand corrected then.

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"He may be a Hotmail user, but the patch works, so who am I to argue?" -- Charles Samuels
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.