Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




KHTML-Win32

Anyone who wants to work on a project that has good, real-world interface challenges and will potentially be used by 10's or 100's of thousands of users ought to go help this guy out: http://khtml-win32.sourceforge.net/

pb
Thursday, February 06, 2003

Just what exactly is KHTML?

It was not clear from the link.

curious
Friday, February 07, 2003

I couldn't figure it out, either.

I thought I was stupid :)

Joel Spolsky
Friday, February 07, 2003

HTML with a K, duh!!!! :-)

Prakash S
Friday, February 07, 2003

Open source HTML rendering engine from the KDE people. It's what Apple's new Safari web browser is built on.

Nathan Silva
Friday, February 07, 2003

Yep, should have been more explicit. With the browser wars supposedly over, who'd be stupid enough to build a new browser, right? But with Apple recently demonstrating that there's still life in the battles and with Mozilla stumbling for 4 years and with the KDE having put together a tight entry, working on a new browser actually might be fun again. And doesn't everyone like working on products that might be used by 10's or 100's of thousands of users?

pb
Friday, February 07, 2003

You bet. Bring on the browsers. The more the merrier. Good luck beating Opera, though. It's telepathic, you know.

Troy King
Friday, February 07, 2003

I think the idea is to port KHTML (an HTML rendering library) to Win32, without using any kind of POSIX emulation (X11, pthreads, etc), which entails re-writing those portions to use the Win32 equivalents (GDI, Win32 threads, etc).

Dan Maas
Saturday, February 08, 2003

Please don't help with this project. ;)

As a sometimes-web-developer, I can't imagine having to test code on yet another platform. Kludging together functional web apps with today's hodgepodge of browser implementations is bad enough. As it stands, users of non-IE browsers usually suffer some lack of functionality in their web apps (simply because over 90% of web users have some IE variant). Why punish another crowd of users just because they want to jump off the Microsoft wagon?

Benji Smith
Monday, February 10, 2003

> As a sometimes-web-developer, I can't imagine having to test code on yet another platform...

This is a troll, right? Have a look at the AnyBrowser campaign for a multitude of reasons why you are misguided:

http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/abfaq.html

Tom Payne
Tuesday, February 11, 2003

While it was certainly fascinating to hear about "why I am misguided," I nevertheless am not interested in testing my code on more than a (very small) handful of browsers.

It takes time to perform testing. It takes time to fix code that doesn't work in a specific platform. And clients are rarely interested in spending money for testing, beyond what is absolutely necessary.

So, for example, I tell my client "I have tested your site in Internet Explorer, versions 4.0, 5.0, 5.5, and 6.0. Approximately 90% of your users are likely to be using one of these browsers. I have also tested your site in Netscape 4.7, 6.0, and 6.1. Approximately 6% of your users are likely to be using one of these browsers." The client then asks me "What about the other 4% of users?" And I will answer, "Those 4% of your users could be using any one of dozens of different browsers or browser versions. I can test on any number of these browsers, but problems with the code will be more difficult to identify and correct. It will approximately double the cost of your project for me to ensure compatibility with these other browsers."

The client will then tell me not to test for those platforms. I've never had any business client care about those 4% of users. Not once.

So don't blame "lazy developers" for corrupting the standards compliance of websites. It doesn't make business sense to do the testing, so few businesses are willing to do it. Web developers are rarely in the position to make such financial decisions.

It pained me to hear the announcement of the new browser for the Mac. It pained me even more to find out that it wasn't based on the Mozilla HTML rendering engine. Because I shudder to have do more testing when I don't really see any benefit to having the additional platform on the market.

Benji Smith
Wednesday, February 12, 2003

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home