Slashdot Mirror
IBM Donates Code to Firefox
OS24Ever writes "Internetnews.com is reporting that IBM has donated new DHTML code to the Mozilla foundation specifically targeted as accessability and rich interactive applications (RIA). These new features are expected to be in the next major update of Firefox (v1.5). Is this the first OSS application to get RIA/DHTML support for accessability? I would think this could open some doors for Firefox to replace IE in many Windows environments."
Well, I can't exactly speak to this topic, but I am not so sure I see it happening, nor do I hear anything about it.
Thanks for supporting Open Source, and thanks for supporting Firefox.
-Random Person.
I would really love to see the code. It is in CVS yet? I am rather excited, since I have been working on several RIA things lately. Anyone seen the code yet? Or at the very least, anyone have a more specific list of new functionality?
bash: rtfm: command not found
Why not go with Java's versioning, and just make 1.5 (version code) release 5!? .. seriously it's great that IBM is contributing back to those communities it is getting the use of... it's how "Free" Software is meant to work. Hopefully this will continue, would love to have a paying job working on f/oss software.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
DHTML is certainly less annoying than 30 second flash intro's, but I want a simple,fast, non-Microsoft browser. I hope this doesn't become a bloated browser like Navigator became.
The Big Yuan - tracking mainland China
the DOM magically becomes the same as MSIE's.
Not unless XML Islands are suddenly implemented.
This comment was randomly generated by a school of piranhas chewing on the PCB of a Microsoft Natural Keyboard.
Name a feature IE has out of the box that firefox doesn't.
Oh come on. Every time there's a Mozilla thread, there is some idiot posting That sounds like Opera's feature X. Christ, get over it. Your browser picked a bad name, and nobody wants to use it, for fear of being all hoity-toity.
Use your opera, that's fine, but don't expect me at any of your parades.
Yup, I know, the Flash player isn't open source. But there's an open source compiler, MTASC (*), and with ActionStep, there's a rapidly growing (BSD licensed!) open source component library.
All sorts of nifty open source things are happening with Flash these days; you can track that sort of thing on OSFlash.
(*) Written in Ocaml, how cool is that? (**)
(**) Very.
The Army reading list
Usually IBM has got good code, so there is hope that this will make a better browser. Certainly, it will be a great merit for firefox. Branding IBM code is a quality sign in my eyes, and might lead to wider acceptance of Firefox, as IBM seems to have noticed the browser.
Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
ActiveX. It's great that FireFox gets a little added functionality, but I've spoken with many IT people that cannot implement FireFox into their network for the simple reason that they need to have ActiveX fuctionality. If we could get that addon(or maybe it exists?) that would be spectacular for FireFox and it's spread.
A Linux flavor for every Month!
Well, IBM uses a lot of OSS software on their servers and various other solutions. Most of the code is GPL'd, so the have to return the source. So IBM gets to use a lot of free stuff, make it better, gives back to the community, and still makes their share holders happy. It seems to be exactl what Slashdot wants.
Does anyone have a version of this article that isn't a vague promise that several buzzwords now have more to do with each other than ever?
I would expect this code actually does something, but the article is so vague I'm not really sure what. What's an example of something that does not work now that will work after this code is integrated and released?
(Preferably from someone who actually knows; I could make stuff up based on the article too, like this: "Before, if you set the ALT attribute on a dynamically-generated IMG tag, the screen-readers couldn't pick it up. Now they can." But I'm not sure if that's what they mean; that's just my plausible interpretation of the buzzword soup that I'm not very confident in, as I would have thought that works fine now....)
stop making up acronyms for every stupid little thing (ESLT).
Long signatures suck.
AJAX has opened many doors for me, and this addition will help me rule the world. To all those who oppose.... hmmmm well....
but seriously, keep buying IBM and support OSS.
Chronology could make the link you provide somewhat invalid. That story mentions that market share slipped last month, yet I don't recall it saying where the figures are right now. But that's probably going to become irrelevant.
;) I don't think Firefox developers are going to let a one month slip get to them.
Even if the user-base hit a plateau already and everyone that wants Firefox, has it, this is article talks about providing accesability to a whole new audience. Being the first in the field does give one an advantage when the two biggest competitors are commercial (Opera) and slower than waiting for a new IE (uh...IE).
I know there are others, but when these are the three biggest players, Firefox stands to gain a good deal of respect in the accesability crowd if they pull this off with IBM.
By all means, it won't topple IE, but providing a good set of features to those with disabilities could actually see Firefox instituted in more public terminal situations like schools, libraries and such.
Besides, OSS tends to be pretty stubborn in the fact that the developers usually stop for nothing short of complete bankruptcy
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
I'd certainly like for it to open doors but features like these won't really matter unless IE pick up on them, too. The sad reality is that most sites need to work 100% with IE and the attitude towards Firefox/Safari is "if the site's legible, then it's ok". Maybe it can get some headway in some specialized areas, libraries or job centers or some other place where accessibility is a real priority, I don't know. I do however know that the one and only thing that will help Firefox dethrone IE is browser stats. It needs to hit some serious percentage. Only then will people stop "optimizing" for IE and start building their HTML according to standards.
:)
Great job on the DHTML patch, though! This sort of thing is why I use Firefox
I work with websites, but have never done anything specifically toward accessibility. Aren't large subsets of the CSS specifications just for those applications, though? CSS2 and CSS3 have large sections devoted to screen readers, plus most browsers have the capability to scale content to whatever size you want. I'd rather see the Firefox crew make sure they handle CSS3 while keeping the bloat out. It'll keep the browser fast while giving site and application developers the option of using those standards.
Really, can DHTML make it that much easier on someone with an impairment than a well designed site using CSS3?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
Yah, and with a nick like OS24Ever, this person is obviously the perfect choice for making predictions about the acceptability and potential for success of a product....
(Sorry, I couldn't resist. I'm a former OS/2 user and licensee myself. "Blue Spine" all the way, baby.)
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
Firefox already adheres to standards better than IE, has a more rubust, and secure environment, and arguably provides a superior user experience to IE, and yet IE lives on... So why would some (arguably nice) DHTML addons make a difference?
I think the situation's kinda like this: Those who care, and/or are "in the know" are already using Firefox.
The rest of the users still left on IE either
- Don't care (lazyness, "not my pc", whatever)
- Are too intimidated by technology to go outside the little box they've created for themselves
- Think IE's still the better browser
I suspect the bulk of the switchers have already switched, and the rest either will not switch until either their OS of choice changes (OSX anyone?), or they are faced with a computer-oriented crime which makes them paranoid about using IE (be it identity theft, stolen cc info, whatever)So while IBM's gift is a "nice to have", I don't see it making a huge difference in the lives of the average IE user. Not at the moment, at least.
Firefox allows site-by-site popup blocking/allowing, would it be too much of a stretch to have the same feature for Javascript?
From my experience, all the new 'pop-unders' that are experienced with Firefox are triggered by Javascript. Of course there are multiple sites that depend on Javascript for core functionality (Gmail, others). So it'd be nice to do a site-by-site feature so that it is easy to put, for example, webshots on the blacklist.
Asa, are you out there and browsing at at least a +2 level?
Look at the fact that IBM is one of the biggest vendors of Linux computers/servers in the world, if not the largest outright. If Linux runs on OSS primarily, then IBM has everything to gain by freely giving code to a project that can help improve the quality of the OS they ship their next systems with.
Even if it's only one program out of a hundred, IBM has nothing to lose by helping the projects that help their systems.
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
You know, code that will help make Flash and its lookalikes accessible to people who maybe can't see or hear?
That's most likely what the poster of the story intended when he/she speaked of being able to "replace IE in many Windows environments."
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
Yes, I'm well aware of the examples. That is what I've been using so far.
But now read from my previous post:
While the various embedding examples are a start, they are very poorly commented and as such are quite useless.
They're better than nothing, but they're still not enough. Myself and many other developers don't have time to sift through numerous examples for platforms we are not necessarily experienced with. Maybe an unemployed university student has time to play with such examples that lack documentation. Professional developers do not.
Like I mentioned before, the examples need to be very well commented, and must be accompanied by up-to-date and usable design docs. Sure, that takes effort, but it is the key to widespread adoption of Gecko.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
My bet is that IBM is still dreaming of a day where the OS is irrelevent, since all your apps are Java based (perhaps even XUL based) and accessable through a standards compliant browser. IBM has a lot of expertise in this area, and stands to make a really nice chunk of change if customers migrate to this way of getting thier apps.
If Firefox gets above 10% marketshare and stays there, IBM should be able to do real damage to the competition by luring thier customers to more open solutions on the Firefox platform and marketing them as liberation from vendor lock in.
I'd buy into that, myself.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
Damn, IBM just sold our campus their WebAdapt2Me product which provides assistive technology for visually and motor impaired web surfers. It works only with MSIE.
The basic features of IBM WebAdapt2Me are: font size adjustment, web page magnification (125%, 150%, 175%, etc.) which magnifies the entire page, font selection (bold, inverse bold, font style), kerning (spacing between letters), leading (spacing between lines). These features go way beyond the MS magnifier functions. If true, this is fantastic news that IBM is dontaing the technology to Mozilla.
signature pending slashdot approval
Just last night I wanted to show my wife a picture of a Merkur XR4TI, so she'd understand why it was funny that Prinicpal Skinner on The Simpsons drives one...
Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
It may help them sell more servers and services?
Wild guess, but custom web-based apps are pretty popular in mega-corps. Mega-corps have to support a wide variety of users, including those with accessibility needs. Making Firefox more accessible in DHTML areas means they could potentially sell more servers and services to better support the needs of mega-corps.
?
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))
With proper planning you can make your website work with IE, Firefox, et.al.
/my $0.02
//Hate the new RIA label of what used to be DHTML/CSS
Obviously this requires not to rely on ActiveX and make more use of compliant DHTML/CSS. Is not pretty but if it's done once it can be replicated with less effort.
Benefits: you make access to your website a non-issue and end up with a better designed system.
Web designers take shortcuts/are lazy and that's why they stick with IE. But that will come to bite them in the A$$ with the next release of IE.
To many people who are only casual users of computers still consider firefox a bad Clint Eastwood movie
Please to remember: there's a difference between a bad movie that has Clint Eastwood in it, and a 'bad' Clint Eastwood movie. As Clint Eastwood movies go, Firefox is pretty damned good, really. Seriously, if you don't believe me, go see "Stealth." *shudder*
And remember: your browser will only work if you think in Russian. Think...In...Russian!
- At some point you're going to need to know how to do [X random thing] that your sample code doesn't already do. Your only options at this point are to start scouring the internet for firefox extensions, looking for extensions which do something kind of like what you want to do, and then looking at their source code to see how they did it; or mercilessly bother the IRC channel until somebody who's already done this comes by
- At some point, inevitably, you're going to hit a point where the sample code deceives you! All code contains implicit contracts. You cannot learn those contracts simply by looking at source code. Without documentation to make those contracts explicit, you are left either breaking contracts-- and thus your entire program, when some other part of the program expects something to be X at a certain time when it is in fact Y-- or doing a crazy kind of cargo cult programming, terrified to change anything unless you break the magic incantation that makes the component or preferences or whatnot system recognize your existence. I lost about two weeks on my project because I looked at the sample code, saw it always did a certain thing a certain way, concluded I could do the same thing the same way elsewhere, and was entirely ignorant as to the fact that there was another file in a totally different part of the package which I had to modify for every instance of this specific thing. What this meant was that I made extremely simple alterations to the file I was working on, and the entire extension broke-- for no reason I was aware of-- because I had accidentally caused a mismatch between the file I was working on and a totally different file.
And this is just for extensions, a VERY common thing many people have done. As I started to poke my nose into more intricate and obscure things-- say, components-- I found the amount of available information on how to proceed went from inadequate to absolutely nonexistent. I can only imagine what you are going through trying to embed the entire engine.Firefox and Google.
Why do I visit Slashdot multiple times a day, everyday? [sigh]
I was recently looking into why the filter tag doesn't work in Firefox, and learned that it's actually DHTML. Exploring the question on the Firefox help forums, I learned that these features, (shadows at least) were likely to make it into 1.5 (next version).
Perhaps this means that Firefox was negotiating with IBM to get this code?
Nobody. Fucking. Cares.
It's not quite what you were asking for but I use the Image Zoom plugin for firefox and it lets you right click on any image and blow it up. This has advantages and drawbacks over Opera's zoom, but for me it's better than Opera's zoom.
Now that GCC supports Objective-C++, it is possible to build WebCore with the GNU toolchain (rather than Apple's fork). Work is already underway porting WebKit to GNUstep. Once this is complete, it will run on Windows, OS X and *NIX/X11. While it won't be Safari, it will have exactly the same rendering engine, and a UI built by people with a similar human interaction philosophy to Apple (or, more accurately, NeXT).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
1.5 is not a major update. 1.5 is a minor update. 2.0 would be a major update. It goes major.minor.
No existe.
I heard that SCO is claiming that code is theirs!
*DUCKING*
The code checks one box that IE doesn't have checked - Accessibilty for rich internet apps.
This is a carefully designed move to further boost Firefox. It's an excellent reason to give for switching, especially at government facilities.
> it has to be miles betters than IE
How about if, after using a modern browser for a few days, the very thought of using IE makes a user's skin crawl and they have to suppress the urge to go take a shower? Oh, wait, that was four years ago, practically forever in internet time, and ad interim IE is the only major browser that has not improved its interface at all.
> and it has to be brought to the attention of
> the public at large
I'm pretty sure that has happened now. My dad, who only knows the difference between the web and email if you explain it three times slowly, approached *me* to ask if he could get "Mozilla Foxfire". He heard about it on a discussion forum dedicated to his hobby (which is not technical in nature and mostly popular with retired people), heard a description of tabbed browsing, and wanted it. He also wanted to download some smileys. This is *not* the esoteric stuff of the techno-elite geek only.
My sister, an elementary school teacher, said that the computers in the schools were "unusable" for the internet, because they use IE. (It was mostly the constant popups she was talking about; they way she described it, I assume they had accumulated some adware that made matters worse than the sites they were visiting intended -- but she didn't know that; she just knew she had to close six windows every time she clicked anything.)
Yes, there are still a lot of people using IE, but what they need more than anything at this point is for a geek with some spare time to service their computers for them: run a spyware check, install Firefox, clean the 8+ obsolete IM clients they don't use anymore out of the Run registry keys, uninstall all the old versions of AOL and the Earthlink Toolbar they haven't used in a couple of years, and, you know, just generally fix the computer up so it works better. Do it for your non-techie friends when you get a chance. They'll thank you. And if there's a Firefox icon on the desktop where the e used to be, they'll use Firefox -- and they'll like it.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Maybe an unemployed university student has time to play with such examples that lack documentation. Professional developers do not.
P Is.html
e rview/EmbeddingBasicsTOC.html
t erfaceFreeze.html
That is a bit of a contradiction in terms. One can be unemployed or be employed by a University to carry out research towards a PhD but not both.
In any case here are some design docs.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/PublicA
A simple introduction
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/embedov
The status of the API freeze (i.e. what APIs you can rely on not to change).
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/embedding/EmbedIn
In any case, actual trivial embedding code is the best documentation IMHO. I detect an attempt at personal abuse suggesting that I'm not a professional developer and would know nothing in this regard. It isn't worth getting into an e-penis size discussion in this regard but if you don't view the wealth of Gecko stuff available as enough then you've no business calling yourself a programmer.
Rich
Just to inform the author of this article, RIA, in this context, stands for Rich Internet Application and NOT Rich Interactive Application. The term was originally coined by Macromedia in late 2003. In addition, Rich Interactive Application is a pretty generic term and could apply to any number of areas where an "application" of any sort (not just an Internet application) might be used.
I don't know about other developers but I'm seriously beginning to stop supporting IE for anything but a basic HTML interface. All the advanced interface features are designed for Firefox. I have no problem with putting a 'Designed for Firefox.' button on my sites and leaving IE users out of the really cool stuff if IE can't keep up.
I'm seriously playing with some sites that combine AJAX, XUL, and Java into a single powerful user-interface. IE will get the same interface that Lynx users get.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
This is nowhere close to IBM WebAdapt2Me which zooms the entire page, not just fonts and not a separate graphics zoom tool. Their WebAdapt2Me tool has several cool features which let you adjust fonts with different sizes, contrast, or weight. You can quickly change the text from black on white to white on black, as well as adjustments for kerning (space between letters) and leading (space between lines). These are all important for accommodation of various visual, motor, and learning impairments.
WebAdapt2me also provides text-to-speach synthesis. Show me a web browser that does all this today. Adaptive software and hardware are quite a bit more complicated that many Slashdot readers realize.
signature pending slashdot approval
You're quite welcome. Thanks for providing us with all of this free code that we have made hundreds of millions from. Our top executives and stockholders and quite happy. Would you like an official IBM polo shirt for all of your effort?
- IBM
I don't respond to AC's.
Surely you're not suggesting that Opera is a worse name for a web browser than Firefox?
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Through the years of Mosaic dominating, then Netscape dominating, then IE dominating, then Mozilla starting over from scratch, then Firefox starting over from scratch, then Firefox getting some code, it's a lot like watching coal miners in the 60's.
No matter what happens in the world. No matter what problems the world has moved onto, there is always this club which eats, sleeps, and breaths web browsers. They insist that winning back the lost users in 1998 is the most important breakthrough, that it wasn't Mozilla rewrite #20 but this version. This is the version which is going to get back the users they lost to Microsoft in 1998.
Just like coal miners saying the future isn't in space, it's underground, these web browser programmers seem to be eternally in 1998, endlessly chasing after the web browser trophy while maybe the world isn't watching anymore.
I have no problem with putting a 'Designed for Firefox.' button on my sites...
These are better... Really.
"Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco