erm. There are solaris test machines. But they are _expensive_ so there are not many. And some of the bugs you are seeing are likely GTK bugs on solaris....
> One prime example is the style object that IE has
> (it provides runtime information about element
> style).
This would be the getComputedStyle() function from DOM2 Style in Mozilla. And it's buggy at the moment for most properties. And it's being worked on (by me, as it happens) and should be much better in a month or so.
> Ship the Fucking Manual already -- w3c.org is
> not a programming guide by any means. Find the
> people that wrote the excellent 4.x
> documentation and put them back to work.
Being worked on by some volunteers. You want to do it?:)
> Make sure that the Javascript/DOM environment is
> solid enough that I can code a heavy DHTML
> interface with it. Just rendering cnn.com, etc
> isn't good enough.
Um. The whole browser UI is in Javascript/DOM. It's fairly solid.:)
If the frigging licensing issues with libart (which is necessary for the svg code) get resolved, there is no reason it could not land in the next two milestones....
There will be a spell-checked when someone has the time to find one that's libre and hook it up using the Mozilla spellcheck interfaces. Wanna do it?
Re:Only people like us appreciate that.
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
"bugs in handling of "
I should preview.:)
Re:Only people like us appreciate that.
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
Dude, my entire school has a Unix-based network. Any student here _has_ to use Netscape; IE is not even supported on Windows/Mac due to bugs in its handling of .
And trust me, as far as computers go there are lots of "average people" here who just want the damn things to work (I know that sounds unlikely, but it's true).
Re:Mozilla Over X Session Not Good
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
There are known performance problems over remote X. They are being worked on, but the number of people who know this sort of stuff and contribute to Mozilla is pretty small....
Re:So what's holding 1.0 back?
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
1.0 would mean an interface freeze for all the embedding and scripting interfaces.
It's not there yet. The interfaces are still being finalized.
Re:Not biased, just practical
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
> Please, be more specific on what is missing from
> Konqueror.
Decent support for the W3C DOM. Decent XML support. Good CSS2 support.
It renders brain-dead sites fine. It does not render sites using current technology fine.
Seeing as Mozilla is supposed to be an application platform, the same argument could be made. And such a book on Mozilla is coming from O'Reilley (can't recall the title at the moment).
OK. All we need now is someone to write something using Pspell to do spell-checking.:) You want to do this? I'm serious. This issue has been bugging me and I don't have the time to learn the spellcheck code while working on other phases of the project.
Also, is pspell easily portable to Mac? I don't know how MacOS Classic's POSIX support is.... and I don't know whether there is something like cygwin for it...
type = submit|button|reset [CI]
This attribute declares the type of the
button. Possible values:
* submit: Creates a submit button. This is
the default value.
Mozilla's just finally gotten around to what is _very_ plain in the spec. use type="button" if you want it to be just a button.
> Anyone else notice that this release's tag now
> automatically works as a submit button
What do you mean by that? Are you referring to the <button> element? If so, a <button> with no type specified is supposed to be of type "submit" per the HTML4 spec. If you want it to be type="button", say so in the tag.
This behavior is not optional because there is no API to request a cached load at the moment. This API is being added. It is not yet in 0.9.4. As soon as it's added, I'll change the view source code to use this API and the problem will be gone. There is an existing patch for "save" that with a few small changes will start working then too.
> I guess I'm wondering why the new versions are so > much slower than the older versions of Netscape
Because it's still beta-quality code? There are many performance issues currently being worked on. Also, some things that NS4 does quickly (eg style resolution) take a lot more time to do _right_.
Re:Mozilla ... Netscape ... what't the difference?
on
Netscape 6.1
·
· Score: 2
I may have to take exception to being called a hanger-on.:)
That being said, there is little difference between current Mozilla and current branch builds. That's the whole point of "rebranding", no?
Slashdot Mirror
It started out as an application framework and has stayed there throughout... as it happens, there is a browser application on top of the framework.
erm. There are solaris test machines. But they are _expensive_ so there are not many. And some of the bugs you are seeing are likely GTK bugs on solaris....
> One prime example is the style object that IE has
:)
:)
> (it provides runtime information about element
> style).
This would be the getComputedStyle() function from DOM2 Style in Mozilla. And it's buggy at the moment for most properties. And it's being worked on (by me, as it happens) and should be much better in a month or so.
> Ship the Fucking Manual already -- w3c.org is
> not a programming guide by any means. Find the
> people that wrote the excellent 4.x
> documentation and put them back to work.
Being worked on by some volunteers. You want to do it?
> Make sure that the Javascript/DOM environment is
> solid enough that I can code a heavy DHTML
> interface with it. Just rendering cnn.com, etc
> isn't good enough.
Um. The whole browser UI is in Javascript/DOM. It's fairly solid.
If the frigging licensing issues with libart (which is necessary for the svg code) get resolved, there is no reason it could not land in the next two milestones....
There will be a spell-checked when someone has the time to find one that's libre and hook it up using the Mozilla spellcheck interfaces. Wanna do it?
"bugs in handling of "
:)
I should preview.
Dude, my entire school has a Unix-based network. Any student here _has_ to use Netscape; IE is not even supported on Windows/Mac due to bugs in its handling of .
And trust me, as far as computers go there are lots of "average people" here who just want the damn things to work (I know that sounds unlikely, but it's true).
There are known performance problems over remote X. They are being worked on, but the number of people who know this sort of stuff and contribute to Mozilla is pretty small....
1.0 would mean an interface freeze for all the embedding and scripting interfaces.
It's not there yet. The interfaces are still being finalized.
> Please, be more specific on what is missing from
> Konqueror.
Decent support for the W3C DOM. Decent XML support. Good CSS2 support.
It renders brain-dead sites fine. It does not render sites using current technology fine.
No. Thanks to the wonders of a platform-dependent non-XUL UI.
Well... it's a platform on top of which we have at the moment the following applications:
1) browser
2) mail client
3) irc client
4) AIM client
5) addressbook
6) whatever's on mozdev.org
> Who wanted this?
Mozilla needed a custom widget set to comply with CSS as well. It seemed natural to use it for the interface too, eliminating porting headaches.
Seeing as Mozilla is supposed to be an application platform, the same argument could be made. And such a book on Mozilla is coming from O'Reilley (can't recall the title at the moment).
Except Mozilla does not use Classic or classic skins. And carbonizing it is _hard_. It's been discussed....
"hover" == "stay in a small holding pattern while moving at 54knots" in this case, I would guess... :)
OK. All we need now is someone to write something using Pspell to do spell-checking. :) You want to do this? I'm serious. This issue has been bugging me and I don't have the time to learn the spellcheck code while working on other phases of the project.
Also, is pspell easily portable to Mac? I don't know how MacOS Classic's POSIX support is.... and I don't know whether there is something like cygwin for it...
Evey browser I know has "Mozilla" in the UA string. This includes IE. That's not really masquerading as Mozilla....
The definition of <button>. Of particular interest:
type = submit|button|reset [CI]
This attribute declares the type of the
button. Possible values:
* submit: Creates a submit button. This is
the default value.
Mozilla's just finally gotten around to what is _very_ plain in the spec. use type="button" if you want it to be just a button.
> Anyone else notice that this release's tag now
> automatically works as a submit button
What do you mean by that? Are you referring to the <button> element? If so, a <button> with no type specified is supposed to be of type "submit" per the HTML4 spec. If you want it to be type="button", say so in the tag.
> 4.x of doing styles right
True. That's really not saying much. I've tried Konqueror and it's style and DOM support is pretty crappy as of last month...
Oh, and aspell/ispell is Unix-only,no?
This behavior is not optional because there is no API to request a cached load at the moment. This API is being added. It is not yet in 0.9.4. As soon as it's added, I'll change the view source code to use this API and the problem will be gone. There is an existing patch for "save" that with a few small changes will start working then too.
> much slower than the older versions of Netscape
Because it's still beta-quality code? There are many performance issues currently being worked on. Also, some things that NS4 does quickly (eg style resolution) take a lot more time to do _right_.
That being said, there is little difference between current Mozilla and current branch builds. That's the whole point of "rebranding", no?