58

Don't forget:
Features provided by KParts and KIO are widely used. Other browsers have equivalent less flexible features, for example: PDF-previews, image-previews, browsing ftp. There were ideas to integrate Okular or KParts into Firefox, but for Konqueror you say: "this feature is too complex".

Konqueror should enlarge the Webbrowsing features but this technologies shouldn't be removed and Konqueror shouldn't be replaced. I think you should write some ideas for better webbrowsing experience. I'm sure, they'll be sometimes implemented.

@Cypher
Thanks, you call me a power-user. *proud*

Also, there was a patch submitted to the KFM mail list for KHTML to support the <video> and <audio> tags with Phonon. This is a step up from Firefox because it doesn't make KHTML huge (by providing support for different formats built-in) and supports more audio and video formats then Firefox (all that your backend supports).

Was the patch applied to the SVN-tree?

No, it hasn't been yet - but I think the developers will make a blog post about it when they review/commit it.

I think it's not a massive priority for them, since few websites use the technology, but I also think they'll be willing to commit it when they're not working on something else, since they didn't have to write it and the patch was provided by a community member...

All the KPart and KIO features provide a generalization of somehow "normal firefox-features". You can just benefit.
Make suggestions for concrete enhancements for the webbrowsing!

Madman wrote:Also, there was a patch submitted to the KFM mail list for KHTML to support the <video> and <audio> tags with Phonon. This is a step up from Firefox because it doesn't make KHTML huge (by providing support for different formats built-in) and supports more audio and video formats then Firefox (all that your backend supports).

Well, to mention it, these tags are no valid html, they are proposed for html5, but this is far from a standard yet. So it is questionable if there is really a need to support it (yet).

For this idea, i would also vote for forking a simple browser and let Konqueror do what he can do best: everything

But when you need such a webbrowser (some people need Dolphin, I don't understand it) it should be a (K)Part of Konqueror unlike Arora or Rekonq.

The User wrote:But when you need such a webbrowser (some people need Dolphin, I don't understand it) it should be a (K)Part of Konqueror unlike Arora or Rekonq.

I need Dolphin since 4.x .
Konqueror is no KPart, it uses KParts, in this case KHTML.

Well, but Dolphin is a KPart.

Ah, got it, sorry...

neverendingo wrote:

Madman wrote:Also, there was a patch submitted to the KFM mail list for KHTML to support the <video> and <audio> tags with Phonon. This is a step up from Firefox because it doesn't make KHTML huge (by providing support for different formats built-in) and supports more audio and video formats then Firefox (all that your backend supports).

Well, to mention it, these tags are no valid html, they are proposed for html5, but this is far from a standard yet. So it is questionable if there is really a need to support it (yet).

See:

Madman wrote:
I think it's not a massive priority for them, since few websites use the technology, but I also think they'll be willing to commit it when they're not working on something else, since they didn't have to write it and the patch was provided by a community member...

;)

@Madman:
Thanks, i read that

Just wanted to mention this for users not knowing that the html5 standard has still a long way to come, and that this is one of the reasons not many websites/browsers support it.

Indeed. Still, it helps the standards themselves, I think, if browsers start to implement these features (for example, the whole file-format debate that sprung up when Firefox implemented native support for .ogg/.ogv). If the standards change, then the feature implementations can change with them: it's not like they have to write the whole thing from scratch all over again...

For example gcc provides a c++-0x-compiler-flag. Why shouldn't there be integrated HTML5-features?

This becomes a bit offtopic. No need to discuss about html5 here. Sure it can be implemented before, but it is not necessarily needed in a working state right now.