[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Warning: changes in khtml
From:       Simon Hausmann <shaus () helios ! Med ! Uni-Magdeburg ! DE>
Date:       1999-11-29 0:14:15
[Download RAW message or body]



On Sun, 28 Nov 1999, Kurt Granroth wrote:

> David Faure wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 01:32:55PM -0700, Kurt Granroth wrote:
> > > Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > > > That's why we decided to leave things as is (not to break stuff for
> > > > Krash) and finish the port of khtmlwidget to become a full fledged
> > > > BrowserView after Krash.
> > > 
> > > By 'BrowserView', I hope you are referring to KParts?
> > Not yet.
> > The current BrowserView is what allows to embed in konqueror.
> > Currently it's not related to KParts,
> 
> Yes, I know :-)
> 
> > but the KParts beind developed in kdenonbeta (a less-koffice-specific
> > KParts) will allows BrowserView to be based on it.
> 
> Okay.. now Simon was referring to *after* KRASH.  It was my assumption
> that Konqueror would be based on KParts... hence my question.
> 
> So let's say that it is now after KRASH and BrowserView now uses
> KParts as the back-end.  A few questions:
> 
> 1) Will the BrowserView API change at all?  That is, will current
>    BrowserView parts have to be rewritten?

I fear it will not be 100% source compatible, but mostly :)

(->only minor modifications)

> 2) Will apps OTHER than Konqueror be able to embed the BrowserView
>    parts?  For instance, will my MyCoolApp be able to embed a
>    kghostview part?  Or will BrowserView still be very specific to
>    Konqueror?

BrowserView inherits KPart :) that says it all :)


Bye,
 Simon

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]