Re: Some proposed package removals and additions

[Ali Abdin <aliabdin aucegypt edu>]

* Maciej Stachowiak (mjs@eazel.com) wrote at 03:19 on 29/08/00:
> Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > > And just because GtkHTML itself is a widget shouldn't necessarily rule out
> > > the idea of building a browser utilizing it, as Encompass does. 
> > 
> > It doesnt have to be about gtkhtml being the wonder widget. Its about choice and
> > making use of the component model. Its aboput saying
> > 
> > 'THis is gtkhtml - good for smaller hosts, this is embedded mozilla which  does
> >  full 4.0 standards compliant dom, css, etc etc'. 
> > 
> > The whole point of a pluggable component module to an end user is controlling
> > their environment. Picking gtkhtml on a small box is a glorified version of 
> > choosing a blue background or vi as an editor.
> > 
> 
> We have both available as Nautilus components right now. Eazel has not
> really maintained the gtkhtml one, since maintaining one web component
> is enough work, but if we decide to drop it totally we wouldn't mind
> someone else breaking it out into a separate package.

Hmmm - say that I have three components that support text/html (plain text,
gtkhtml, mozilla). How would Nautilus/Oaf choose between these three
components. Is there (or will there) be a way to 'prioritize' this type of
stuff (in the 'Help Component', text/html was supported by these three
components - mozilla 'failed' so it was basically a toss-up between plain
text, and gtkhtml - plain text won randomly (even though we would have liked
to tell it to use mozilla, gtkhtml, then plain text in order of priority).

I hope that the above paragraph was clear :)

Regards,
Ali