Re: gtkhtml2 vs. gtkhtml1

[Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>]

Hi Bill,

On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 14:15, Bill Haneman wrote:
> > 	Since we effectively provide a sort of 'DOM' via the Atk system, it
> > seems particularly pointless to waste a huge amount of time creating
> > another parallel-but-different way to do so, since it cannot (shouldn't)
> > add anything useful that Atk+ doesn't do.
> 
> But a "sort of DOM" is not w3c DOM, which is what the w3c UAG requires.

	Yes, my question is why bother with the w3c spec, when it mandates that
we waste our time[1], providing duplicate functionality with a different
API. It seems that only Australia has 'reference to w3c' standards. [cf.
http://developer.gnome.org/projects/gap/laws.html]

	So - does that mean we have to spend months duplicating effort,
producing an interface that it's unlikely anyone will ever use, and
doesn't give any more power ?

	Hmm,

		Michael.

[1] - in absolutely huge truck loads.
-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot