Konqueror Passes the Acid2 Test Too 372
An anonymous reader writes "A month after Safari , and after a lot of controversy, Allan Sandfeld Jensen announced today that Konqueror passes the Acid2 test too. Half of the patches could be merged from Apple's Webcore, the rest needed to be rewritten from scratch."
Acid2 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Acid2 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Acid2 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Acid2 (Score:5, Informative)
basically it's a rigorous test that ensures that a browser has all the goodies that web developers have been lusting after forever.
Re:Acid2 (Score:2)
I wouldn't say that much... Gecko renders the smiley face pretty shoddily but copes with almost all web pages fine, for example. If you look at the source, the acid2 test uses bizarre things like PNG images in the source, negative height values, clear float elements, and so on - things that should work, but aren't likely to come up on many web pages any time soon.
Although, it
Re:Acid2 (Score:4, Interesting)
When all popular web browsers do a decent job of rendering Acid2, web developers can use the features that have been promised for years, but have never been delivered by browser makers. Having Safari and Konqueror display Acid2 correctly gives the other browser manufacturers added incentive to implement the needed CSS2 features.
Re:Acid2 (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Acid2 (Score:2)
Re:Acid2 (Score:2, Informative)
+1 Insightful, that parent poster (Score:2)
Re:Acid2 (Score:5, Informative)
It does both. I've seen this misconception stated a few times now, it's just wrong.
The Acid test is not just a test for error handling. Error handling is something that is defined by the CSS 2.1 specification (and earlier specifications). In order to test full CSS compliance, they need to include errors as part of the test. This does not mean that all the test does is error handling, merely that it is one of the things the test does.
Re:Acid2 (Score:5, Funny)
Glad to see it... (Score:3, Insightful)
Congrats Konqueror team!
I wonder if anyone is working on a Windows port of this?
Konqueror (Score:2, Redundant)
IE quirks (Score:2)
This could be because the page itself is broken but it works in IE. Being standards compliant is very different from being able to render the same as in IE. Firefox has probably spent a little more effort on mimicking IE's quirks and less on standards compliancy.
It's good to have both browsers to choose from.
Re:Konqueror (Score:2)
Care to paste the URLs or are you simply on a rant?
Odd (Score:2)
I find myself going back to firefox because konq tends to pause a bit on some sites (especially flash and animated gif heavy sites) before rendering the page. To be truthful, the actual time I wait to get a page I
Re:Odd (Score:2)
Re:Odd (Score:2)
Re:Konqueror (Score:2)
For example, this site i developed [ica.org.ve] can't center the table properly, with valid css code. On firefox it works fine.
IW4M (Score:2)
Re:Strange (Score:2)
Most of the links on this page don't work in konq. 3.40
Even my crappy little hp C7680A is recognised... (Score:2)
It worked out well for everyone (Score:3, Insightful)
Does it really matter what Apple's motivations were? The end result is that Open Source development has helped both products.
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
The Konqueror team don't have access to the Safari code, at least not in a form they can use. Apple do have access to the KHTML code in a usable form though, the KDE guys make sure it's available in the right way for everybody.
Does it really matter what Apple's motivations were? The end result is that Open Source development has helped both products.
Clearly it does matter what their motivations are, this always matters. It means in future open source projects will know what's coming when Apple decide to get "involved".
As to whether it helped both products, well of that I'm sceptical. A key KDE developer has very publically burnt out on KHTML because of Apples actions and worse, because of the community of Apple fanboys who switched the blame around onto the KDE people. After starting out optimistic he's now bitter. I'd say that's a pretty huge loss.
Meanwhile, Apple got the code to a rendering engine for free and gave back little to nothing. It's like TransGaming all over again.
Disconnect (Score:2)
The fact that they were able to use ha;f the patches says otehrwise. They may not have access to ALL the code. But they do have access to at least some of it as demonstrated by the FACT that they used it.
As to whether it helped both products, well of that I'm sceptical.
Well is passes Acid2 now. Something is better. You're just trying to paint the worst face possible on something that is a mixture of good a
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:3, Insightful)
The Konqueror team don't have access to the Safari code, at least not in a form they can use.
Apple's doing the minimum stated in the license... if the Konqueror team doesn't like this, they used the wrong license.
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:2)
According the the summary, half of the patches were taken from Apple. They might not have access in ideal form, but it's better than nothing.
It means in future open source projects will know what's coming when Apple decide to get "involved".
If Apple didn't base Safari on KHTML, Konqueror wouldn't be Acid2 compliant now. From TFA:
All in all not a bad reuse of code, allthough slow.
The developers understand t
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:2)
Strangely, I feel no sympathy for a developer who gets burned out when a big company writes code for them...
"Meanwhile, Apple got the code to a rendering engine for free and gave back little to nothing."
This is an obscene bit of rhetorical hopscotch. Apple did exactly what companies SHOULD be doing. They took advantage of open source
stop distorting facts (Score:4, Insightful)
Actions speak otherwise- half the patches integrated according to the article.
It means in future open source projects will know what's coming when Apple decide to get "involved".
Yes. They can expect to get regular tarballs, participation of senior team leaders, active dialog on public mailing lists, and assistance of Apple engineers in interpreting the tarballs.
(No, seriously. Go read the archives and look at the discussion that follows when Apple sends in a code base. The "burnt out guy" whines. Another developer or two actually get to work and look at the code, start talking to Apple engineers, etc. An Apple engineer says "let me take a look at that" and a little bit later, comes back as promised with an answer and help.)
After starting out optimistic he's now bitter.
Optimistic is a funny word. He seemed under the impression that Apple was obligated to provide changelogs, access to internal revision control systems, etc. He also got upset when he realized that Apple had forked code. It sounds like he had unreasonable expectations, and when Apple said "I'm sorry, we can't do that" or "I'm sorry, we're not allowed to do that", he threw a hissy fit.
The Konqueror developer in question also used a logical fallacy called "Stacking the deck", a kind of fallacy-by-omission. He did not discuss any of Apple's assistance provided to developers on the mailing list, and repeatedly asserted that Apple was meeting "minimum" requirements of the LGPL, when in fact Apple was doing more.
That is why he got burned. Not because of actions on Apple's part- and your insinuation that Apple is to blame for the actions of its "Apple fanboys" is absurd. You're distracting from the core issue- that the developer used fallacies to promote his version of the facts. Sadly, few people bothered to actually read the mailing list exchanges.
Apple got the code to a rendering engine for free and gave back little to nothing
Again, you're distorting facts. Apple gave back all the code it was obligated to, and participated in an active dialog. If half of Apple's patches were integrated within less than a few months, that's a lot more than "little to nothing". Question- how long would it have taken the KHTML developers to become Acid2 compliant without the contributions by Apple? And if the patches were so worthless, why did they "waste" time and effort if writing their own stuff from scratch would have been more productive, as was implied if not outright stated by khtml developers?
Re:stop distorting facts (Score:5, Informative)
The developer in question was not mad at Apple per say, they were doing what was required. He was mad at people thinking Apple was doing something useful for KDE/khtml. Apple was not making things useful for KDE, but they were fullfilling all their obligations.
Once he spoke against those non-Apple, non-KDE people, those people tried to deflect the blame to Apple. Apple to their credit realized how the publicity was hurting them and changed their ways.
Once again, the KDE devs were not mad at Apple. They were disgusted because of being unable to get something useful, but not mad. They were mad at people who thought without checking that Apple was doing something useful.
Re:It worked out well for everyone (Score:2)
It's not a case of how different they are, it's a case of Apple using MacOSX specific APIs in their patches, not splitting them up so they can't be merged without triggering regressions, not documenting what changes fix and so on.
Did you miss the part where Konqueror's Acid2 compliance was largely merged from WebCore?
The pat
IE, when? (Score:5, Funny)
And only then, we could design web sites using today's CSS features. Oh, not today's, 5 years ago's but it will still be a revolution.
Re:IE, when? (Score:5, Interesting)
Acid2 tests a lot of corner-case mis-constructions of CSS, and tests that the browser handles the cock-up in the prescribed manner. It doesn't actually test that _correct_ CSS is handled correctly.
Its a good test, but its NOT a full CSS compliance test.
Re:IE, when? (Score:4, Informative)
We'll also expect you to hold your breath doing this excercise on a live webcam, so we can see you turn blue in the face.
The acid2 test consists of perfectly valid CSS2.1, HTML 4.01, SGML, RFC 2396 and RFC 2397. It tests some basic, and some not-so-basic aspects of these specs.
Re:IE, when? (Score:2)
Re:IE, when? (Score:4, Informative)
This is incorrect.
The W3C implemented a change in procedure between the times CSS 2.0 and CSS 2.1 were published. What used to be called recommendations are now only candidate recommendations until they are widely implemented.
Ian Hickson, who is on the CSS working group and employed by Opera, says this [hixie.ch]:
Re:IE, when? (Score:3, Interesting)
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fww
Re:IE, when? (Score:2, Informative)
But the CSS doesn't [w3.org].
Re:IE, when? (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:IE, when? (Score:3)
This is the second or third time I've seen this posted in this article alone. You are completely wrong. You would know this if you had actually read the code or even just the guided tour [webstandards.org].
The guided tour explains that there are a number of features tested; it lists eleven areas of the specifications th
Write it anyway... (Score:2)
Re:IE, when? (Score:2)
Slashdot moderation madness (Score:3, Funny)
It is currently scored "Interesting". Did nobody find the "funny" moderation option or are you taking this serious?
Why don't they already? (Score:2)
To really make the point, the page should include an evil-but-signed ActiveX control (the original "run once, ruin everything" technology).
Only a month behind (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Only a month behind (Score:2)
please, go spread your fear, uncertainty and doubt elsewhere. the project is doing well and as a whole is growing day by day.
if you are truly concerned, you could of course help out. if you aren't a developer, there's documentation, bug triage and so much more! you could even help find new developers by making sure more people are aware of KDE a
Re:Only a month behind (Score:2)
Re:Only a month behind (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Only a month behind (Score:2)
http://gtk-webcore.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
That's easy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:That's easy (Score:2)
Re:That's easy (Score:2)
Opera will be next me thinks (Score:4, Interesting)
Safari does what? (Score:2)
Re:Safari does what? (Score:3, Informative)
Open KHTML Info Page Launched (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:3, Insightful)
Konqueror guys didn't like the patches from apple.
Looks like they could handle these patches, though! good for them.
jeff
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:3, Interesting)
The more interesting question is; could Apple be doing less and still be within the bounds of the license.
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:2)
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:2)
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:2)
There's no "better" / "worse"; they either are abiding by the terms of the licence, or they're not. No matter what you'd like them to be doing above and beyond the terms of the licence, the fact is, they are abiding by its terms. If the Konquerer team wanted more than that, they should have selected a licence that specified as much.
If they're not meeting the terms of the licence, I would suggest you point out precisely which clauses they aren't abiding by here (wher
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:4, Insightful)
I've programmed professionally for a living for about 10 years. Never met anyone who edit patchs or changesets as their primary method editing code. I've seen people fix up patches and then apply them (even that is very rare). I've seen them review the history of the code via the VCS. However, not a single person I've ever met, generates a patch from scratch and then applies it to the source. They edit the source and generate patches. The patches are there merely as a convienent way to express the changes.
Comments you might have a point (lacking the comments, I could see a legitimate argument that it's a simplified form of variable and function obfusication), but patchsets are completely irrelavent, they are a by-product of the editting, they aren't necessary to build the source. They aren't what anyone edits to create source. I never have to edit an old patchset to fix a problem. I just go edit the source code.
Patchsets are useful for pulling in other peoples changes, they aren't useful for making changes to the software yourself. Nobody will interpret what you want that to mean in a legal sense.
Kirby
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:2)
Anything in the GPL that hints that you should release patches in small digestible chunks?
Anything in the "spirit" of the GPL that says I have to test my fixes for _your_ platform?
I got a bug, I fix it for my platform, I submit the changes back. It's up to _you_ to figure out how to patch it for your platform.
Anything in the GPL that says "your code should be commented and readable"? How many other contributors to GPL projec
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, there's the bit that says you have to release "in the preferred form for making modifications", and it is implied in the preamble that is what you use yourself to modify it. I very much doubt the huge monolithic patchsets are what apple devs use internally, far more likely they use their VCS tree complete with comments. So that's what they should release.
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:3, Interesting)
They could use it from a proprietary, ecrypted version control system too. SHould they release that?
The clause in the GPL/LGPL is to prevent someone from obfuscating the code before release.
Apple does not have to release a change set of any kind. THey can simply release the entire source tree and they will be conforming with the license requirements. period. You may not like it, but that is valid.
By the way, a lot of developers using version control still don't use decent comments. You assume Apple does.
The GPL was *NOT* violated by Apple (Score:2)
*Sigh* Just because you want more from (whoever, Apple in this case), it doesn't give you the right to demand more than is required by the terms of any given contract or licence. It certainly doesn't give you the right to accuse them of breaking those terms when you're fully aware that they haven't.
I'm assuming you're fully aware because of the enormous hoo-haa that developed when the story first broke... No-one (not Apple (!), not the KHTML team, not anyone even remotely informed) claimed that the licence
Re:The GPL was *NOT* violated by Apple (Score:2)
The GPL doesn't require anything else, and they aren't doing anything like intentionally obfuscating the code. Of course, finding your way around a large body of code is a daunting task. But making your code easy to understand is not som
Re:The GPL was *NOT* violated by Apple (Score:2)
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:5, Insightful)
Doing more then what? By what people can tell, most of the dispute is because the Safari/WebCore and the Konquer people are doing different things with the code and also use different source managment systems. Apple uses one that most of the OS X devs use. And that is completly different then the one the KDE folks use.
Thus far, most of the complaints has been "Apple isn't doing it our way." Apple shot back with "Use WebCore, we will even show you how and assist on making it multiplatform", but that got shot down by the K folks. The issue isn't just with one side, it's with both using their normal work flows and expecting the other side to change everything.
Apple doesn't ship Konquer in their OS and has no plans to. KDE has no plans to use WebCore. So diversity issues are going to happen, and either side can just live with it, or do something about it. But it seems the KDE folks would just rather sit and whine about how Apple isn't doing things their way.
Maybe I missed it, but if you can point out to me where in the GPL it says you must bend over backwards to make a group of people happy, I'll conclude Apple is doing something wrong. Until then, I'll file this under the "people are never happy" section, and be one of the few to appreciate what Apple is doing to help OSS, and to promote the adoption of Unix in many areas. Sure, it's not the Linux way of things, but Apple is doing a hell of a lot better then say Sun with Solaris or HP with Tru64/HPUX to push the Unix platform across all spaces.
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:4, Insightful)
What if the KDE developers say that the preferred form is on a 160GB SCSI drive installed in a dual G5 with a 30" Cinema display attached to it, does Apple have to comply with THAT?
I think that people may be taking those words from the GPL a little too far. To me, what they mean is that if I get a binary, I need to get the source required to recreate that binary.
Re:Any more news on GPL violating? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:4, Insightful)
Like you said... (Score:2)
"Acid2 is a CSS/HTML test suite put out by the Web Standards Project (WASP)."
Exactly what would you like engraved on your silver platter?
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:4, Informative)
Take the Acid 2 Test [webstandards.org].
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:2, Informative)
Recently, one of the Safari developers announced [mozillazine.org] that Safari (the HTML parsing part of which is Webcore, which is derived from KDE's KHTML component) now passed the Acid 2 test. This led to a lot of comment, on Slashdot and elsewhere, asking when Konqueror (KDE's web browser) would pass Acid 2. This led to a post by a KDE developer saying that Webcore and KHTML had diverged significantly, and th
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:2)
This ignores the properly informed issue. That there were no patches from Apple at all, just complete release tarballs that the KHTML guys got access to along with everyone else and then had to diff to several megs of text worth of changes and then sort through it.
This was the FIRST case of Apple giving the KDE guys patches at all. This is not a vendication of Apple's previous practices (which w
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:2)
Slashdot has extensively covered the apple patches/khtml/webcore controversy and shouldn't have to reexplain it every time something tangentially rel
Re:Editors! Context! (Score:2)
I know it's easy to claim you know everything already and don't need any context for anything you read, but that's just bad journalism.
Re:Kick to the pants. (Score:5, Interesting)
It's amazing what people can do when sufficiently motivated.
THIS sort of thing is EXACTLY what the khtml devs were complaining about. Yes, Apple does the bare minimum the LGPL requires with Webcore but the khtml devs accepted that.
The point these guys have been trying to get across over and over and over and over (repeat several thousand times for the extra dense) is that when Webcore can do something that khtml cannot IT IS NOT LAZINESS ON THE PART OF THE KHTML DEVELOPERS. WEBCORE CODE CANNOT JUST BE DROPPED INTO THE KHTML TREE. Webcore directly uses OS X features. That is one problem. The code bombs Apple drops periodically have inadequate documentation as to why some changes were made and not others.
Webcore at this point is a khtml fork that is about two years old. The khtml devs might as well be asked to merge Gecko code for all of the similarity they have at this point.
Re:Kick to the pants. (Score:2)
stacking the deck (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, if you read the email exchanges, you see Apple engineers discussed the patch tarballs and actively assisted khtml developers when they asked for reasonable things (ie, not access to internal Apple revision control systems). KHTML devs did not reveal this (to my knowledge) in their "open letter" this cooperation, which is quite a bit more than the LGPL. The LGPL requires you make the patches available- that's it. Apple sent them, discussed them, provided help interpreting them, did work by proxy, etc.
This is a logical fallacy called "fallacy by omission", and the specific technique employed was called "Stacking the Deck".
What becomes apparent is that the KHTML team doesn't like that Apple is doing everything they should be, getting commended for it, and that the work (supposedly) wasn't useful to them (we see now that's not the case, as half the patches were easily applied).
If integrating half of the patches only took a month or two, guess what- it wasn't nearly as impossible as the KHTML team made it out to be, and the code wasn't nearly as useless as they portrayed it to be.
WEBCORE CODE CANNOT JUST BE DROPPED INTO THE KHTML TREE. Webcore directly uses OS X features. That is one problem. The code bombs Apple drops periodically have inadequate documentation as to why some changes were made and not others.
The second is irrelevant because of the first; they're also unrelated, though you imply them to be compounded. It's not Apple's responsibility to turn over Webcore, or convert the code to use something besides Webcore. They're not allowed to sit on that code, they HAVE to provide it.
Second, they've provided several of what you've referred to as "code bombs", which is one step ahead of a company that would just provide them with ONE tarball; they're sharing work progressively, and have an active dialog with the khtml team.
Webcore at this point is a khtml fork that is about two years old.
And your point would be what? The LGPL doesn't say "help integrate old code". It doesn't say, "only fork recent code", or "don't fork code at all". It doesn't say "provide changelogs". It doesn't say "provide the project coders with access to your internal revision control systems and corporate network". It doesn't say ANY of that! EVER! PERIOD!
I'm sorry, but this whole thing has left me very embarrassed for the open-source community, and left me with a very bad taste in my mouth. Apple IS one of the better companies as far as contributing to open-source, they've brought open-source technologies to more desktops than anyone else, they've come up with some truly unique technology which they've provided source for- and they still get kicked in the teeth.
A lot of companies are looking at how Apple was treated, and thinking, "geez, Apple did more than just send tarballs, and they got pretty beat up for it." Question: do you think this will encourage or discourage companies to do work on open-source projects?
Re:stacking the deck (Score:4, Informative)
The khtml devs beef is with fanbois who think that khtml should have new Webcore features an hour or two after Webcore gets them. When the khtml people try to explain why matters are bit more difficult than that then the fanbois throw around terms like "lazy", "unresponsive", and "kick in the pants".
Apple's behaivor has zero to do with the point I was trying to make.
Re:stacking the deck (Score:4, Informative)
Re:stacking the deck (Score:3, Informative)
None of this is utterly terrible. Webcore can be used in isolation. khtml can be used in isolation. Adding beneficial features from Webcore isn't triv
Re:stacking the deck (Score:4, Informative)
That's not apparent at all. You're simply showing that you don't read the kde dev's blogs and hope people reading this won't bother either and just take your word for it.
What? How do you know how hard these people have been working over the last two months? You really sound like a manager type to me. These people mostly do this work in their spare time. They have real jobs too. They don't work on this 9-5. Saying "it only took a team of x y months to do it" is completely meaningless.
Hahaha.
Read that sentence again and tell me it's not the absolute definition of an apologist talking.
And nobody has ever said that it does. Only people like you trying to craft strawman attacks have ever brought this up. The grandparent doesn't say this, the KDE devs don't say this.
First of all: hahaha
Second of all: if they are getting kicked in the teeth, it's not the kde devs doing the kicking. The original blog post was aimed at clueless fanboy posters posting things.. not unlike what you've just posted. NOT at Apple. This one blog post was then blown out of all proportion by slashdot and people making strawman statements to try and spread their propoganda.
Ironic, no?
Re:stacking the deck (Score:3, Insightful)
I presume you are familiar with the logical fallacy in your own response: Red Herring. For those just joining in, the Red Herring fallacy is one where someone starts arguing a point unrelated to the actual subject, usually in an attempt to draw attention away from weaknesses in that someone's arguments.
The original poster, like the KDE developer who made the initial complaint, wasn'
Re:Kick to the pants. (Score:5, Informative)
When Konqueror doesn't follow Safari's new feature within 4 hours, don't blame us. When Konqueror finally follows Safari's feature list, don't automatically praise Apple, either.
It's not like Apple is giving out some drop-in patch, but that's OK. That's their right. Sometimes we take their patch, but sometimes we write things from scratch. When we'll use Apple's code, we'll be slow because of the way they produce their patch, not because we're lazy.
Apple is OK for me, but please stop bashing our laziness while praising opensource-friendliness of Apple. That hurts.
Have you forgotten what free software means? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, let's be clear. Apple does ALL AND EVERYTHING that the LGPL requires. Implicit in your statement is the suggestion that free software can be free if it includes tacit, implied promises not to fork and to satisfy its authors with all its changes. That suggestion is flagrantly inconsistent with the notion of free software, in any sense.
Fundamental to the notion of free software is that its authors cannot limit the rights of others to access and modify the software. Forking is not a problem with free software, it is a feature.
Ordinarily forking *is* a problem for the community, when the initial developers are adequately satsifying the needs of the community as a whole and working well with others. But this is not always the case. Sometimes politics, legitimate and petty, and aesthetics, legitimate and ludicrous, gets in the way of good agile development. When that happens, the community may well be better served by a fork.
Apple and the Konqueror clan were not working well together, but both had important and significant constituencies to serve. It was either going to work or not, but neither Apple nor the clan "owned" this free software. In its feral state, BOTH were free to decide by what methodology development of their respective trees will proceed, what features the code will have and what will be the quality of that code.
Darwin (no pun intended) takes care of the rest.
Evolution by forking is not the preferable state of nature, but it happens when it needs to happen. And people will abandon what is useless and use what is important.
If, someday, there is actually a need to harmonize this code, it will be harmonized. Otherwise, it may well be for the best there was a fork. The problem that it is difficult to harmonize advances in one tree into another is salient, but it is not due to any malfeasance of anybody. Apple WAS FREE to do what it would with the code. And glory be for that... So, too, is the Konqueror clan, and glory be for that.
The remaining whines in the message are puerile. Don't like the doco or the coding style? Its free software, change it. Don't like the way others are working on the code? No problem, ignore them, and use the free software of the existing code. Got a feature you need? Great. Code it up. Don't want to? No problem, but why are you posting your gripes HERE?
Apple has a free software realationship with the K-clan. K-clan could work with them or not, and vice-versa. If it doesn't work out, so be it. The code is out there. It was built the way it was built, and people may use it or not. Nobody has a gripe, because it is free software -- if you don't like it -- change it.
The solution is obvious... (Score:2)
Even if you couldn't code to save your life, you can document, test, draw/paint/sing/play data, promote and other stuff and use the respect that earns within each project community to convince the coders to do mroe of what you're interested in. "You fix this JavaScript bug and I'll turn the attached sample icon into a whole theme for you," sort of thing.
Re:Does Firefox pass it? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Konq/Opera/Safari Still missing features (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:iCab (Score:2)
(Since I can't read the site I don't know)
Re:iCab (Score:2)
Re:iCab (Score:2)
And it lived on the Atari ST (and descendants) for several years before that, too, as CAB - the Crystal Atari Browser [transaction.free.fr]. It got fairly advanced [application-systems.de], too...
Re:iCab (Score:2)
The answer to your question is... (Score:2)
So: no, it does not rely on Webcore.
You don't need to be able to read French to figure that out from the linked page.
In addition, "Faux, iCab n'utilise PAS WebCore" is pretty obvious as a reponse to "Une version beta de iCab, utilisant probablement une version de dev de webcore", and if you're still not sure, cheat, feed the whole page [google.com] to Google Translate [google.com] and see what comes out: "Forgery, iCab does not use WebCore".
Re:Too bad the test itself is broken (Score:3, Informative)