Re: gtkhtml2 vs. gtkhtml1

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 15:49, Radek Doulík wrote:
> On Út, 2002-09-17 at 10:49, Sander Vesik wrote:
> > On 17 Sep 2002, Radek [ISO-8859-1] Doulík wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Út, 2002-09-17 at 03:51, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
> > > > tis 2002-09-17 klockan 08.19 skrev Biswapesh Chattopadhyay:
> > > > 
> > > > > 2) To render help pages and show HTML mail, we do not need:
> > > > > 	a) Full HTML 4.0.1
> > > > > 	b) Full CSS1/2 support
> > > > > 	c) Full DOM1/2 support
> > > > > 	d) Full JS1.5 support
> > > > 
> > > > We *do* want both CSS and DOM for the help stuff (at least). 
> > > 
> > > Why do we need these for the help stuff?
> > > 
> > 
> > Fpr DOM part you will have to talk to billh, but we definately want css2
> > for help for layout and formating.
> 
> Yeah, my question was meant more like, do we really need those or
> couldn't we somewhat overcome it? What are the reasons to use CSS? I
> don't think help layout is so complicated that it must use css2 for
> layout and formating. At least from what I've seen, the GNOME help pages
> have pretty simple layout and formating.
> 
> Bill, why do we need DOM?

CSS is very helpful for accessibility, but there are other ways of
reformatting.

However the w3c accessibility User Agent Guidelines require that DOM be
made available by HTML and similar content viewing agents.  We don't
seem to have any alternate way of meeting this requirement.  Of course
right now we don't expose DOM (yet) but clearly we can't if the user
agent doesn't use it :-)

Perhaps a future solution would be to use a gecko or Moz=based viewer
for such content in "accessibility" cases.

Best regards,

-Bill

> Radek
> 
> PS: Sorry for my basic question, but I would like to make it clear for
> myself.
>