11

Hello,
Don't you think that a tool to report the developers that a web site doesn't work in konqueror as expected could help to make it better?

I've seen that Firefox has a such tool, and I think that konqueror could benefit a lot from it, just because this way the developers could concentrate work on most reported problem, so the "perceived quality" of the browser could increase.
Or, at least, you can let the people know that you care about making konqueror better...

regards
gerlos

While I think in theory this shouldn't be necessary, and Firefox compatibility came to most Web sites as its popularity grew, I do think this is a useful feature to have, even if it just takes the user to Bugzilla and guides them through filing a bug report.

At all Konqueror has the job to interpret (X)HTML, CSS, Javascript and so on. All of them have really detailed documentations. It would be adequate to support that for browsers and websites. You can't change your browser because a website is cruft.

Some really big problems like Google Mail can be discussed separately in a bug tracker.

Sometimes there are bugs in html engine or javascript engine. This idea will help to discover that.

SebastianHRO wrote:At all Konqueror has the job to interpret (X)HTML, CSS, Javascript and so on. All of them have really detailed documentations. It would be adequate to support that for browsers and websites. You can't change your browser because a website is cruft.

I agree on this point: ina perfect world, everyone (people who write websites and people who write browsers) will follow standards and everything will go fine.
But unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world, and some websites that you expected to work with your favourite browser (Konqueror, for me) simply don't.

So I think you need to gather as much information you can, and try to understand why it didn't work and how to fix it, if possible and if it's browser fault, obviously.

SebastianHRO wrote:Some really big problems like Google Mail can be discussed separately in a bug tracker.

Ok, but there's not only google mail: for example, some javascript things used in forms in a default installation of drupal 5 (not the newest one) don't work with Konqueror. And there's a lot of drupal based websites out there, and most of them use perfectly standard code. But there's not so much people reporting bugs in kde bugzilla.

So I think that making bug reporting easier for the average user will help making konqueror better. You know: not everyone contribute to forum.kde.org, and even less people contribute to bugs.kde.org.

But maybe the most important thing is the feeling you give to the user: with a such tool, you a saying him/her that you care about Konqueror, and that you want a more competitive Konqueror.

Everything, obviously, imho.

gerlos

Why talking about a perfect world? Of course thousands of websites are "optimized" for Internet Explorer 5 or earlier. They don't look good even on later IEs. But that is a bug of these pages, not with current browsers. And of course following standards has become more and more important and nowdays most people reckognize that making a webpage for IE is not the correct way. That hasn't to do with a perfect world - that's logic.

Konqueror should (and in fact does) follow standards of W3C as far it is implemented yet. That is the process the development should follow. There are a lot of helpers to go this way, like the acid tests.

And then we will see what's the problem with Drupal for example. Please be carefull with "standard code". Validators are great tools but they only lead to correct syntax. Unfortunately that has nothing to do with semantic. Proving that a script does what it is supposed to do in this context is much to complex.

And at last I disagree with the feeling of the user: This kind of button or menu item would lead to the question why it is there. Most of the users don't have a clue that most websites are not like they shall be and this would look very confusing for them. "What? With this browser I can't visit all pages in the Internet?" I think that's not the right way.