Re: [dev] Re: Why HTTP is so bad?

From: Hadrian Węgrzynowski <hadrian_AT_hawski.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 23:52:50 +0200

Dnia 2013-05-27, o godz. 23:32:48
Dmitrij Czarkoff <czarkoff_AT_gmail.com> napisał(a):

> On May 27, 2013 11:13 PM, "Nick" <suckless-dev_AT_njw.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Netsurf's rendering libraries are pretty suckless. But they don't
> > have at all complete javascript / dom support yet, so it's only as
> > useful as lynx (which is to say, rather useful, but not for
> > everything that is convenient to do on the web).
>
> NetSurf basicly only supports HTML and CSS2 (with some portion of
> CSS3, but far from being complete or on par with Webkit or GECKO).
> Indeed lynx is a better choice in most cases.
>
> Still, there is quite a lot of overengineered websites that require
> JS (one of the sites I have to use regularly uses JS cookies for
> session stuff), and neither lynx nor NetSurf are of any use there.
>
> FWIW there still quite a lot of browser-specific quirks here and
> there, even including browser-specific tags, which defeats the very
> idea of suckless rendering engine.
>
> ----
> Dmitrij D. Czarkoff

I like to think that suckless browser should render web in readable
and useful way, not adhere to all standards. For example support only
two fonts: monospace and proportional. Only partial CSS support is
needed. Problem starts with JS.
Received on Mon May 27 2013 - 23:52:50 CEST