Mustafa Muhammad composed on 2015-07-25 08:40 (UTC+0300): > Felix Miata wrote: >> 1-Its UI is mature (predictable, comfortable for those who need to get work done) >> 2-It incorporates a choice of two rendering engines, one matching the >> functionality of Chromium (WebKit), > It does NOT match the functionality of Chrome > http://html5test.com/ > Konqueror with WebKit 355 out of 555 > Chrome 526 out of 555 > Firefox 467 out of 555 > Chrome uses Blink, a fork of WebKit, even when Chrome used WebKit, it > was faster and offered better HTML5 support (maybe kwebkitpart used an > older version of WebKit). So Konq matches Safari rather than Chrom*. Big deal. HTML5 is a moving target, in constant development, with as yet no final spec. The browser engine developers are free to spend time implementing proposals and expectations as they see fit to justify spending time on a spec that may again change or might be more easily implemented by waiting and working it in alongside some expected upcoming change. What really matters is not how many out of 555 or whatever the combination of locked-in and still mutable is met, but how well any engine syncs up with results from its competition on real web pages written and styled by real web stylists, so that special adaptations or workarounds directed to specific engines are not required to get results matching cross-browser. It also matters whether a browser can do what the user wants. Far behind as KHTML is behind the others, it can do things others cannot, and only Konq offers it. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
