Felix Miata wrote: > A high proportion of extension functionality here serves the purpose of > restoring functionality (compared to Netscape/Mozilla Suite/SeaMonkey) > lost or rearranged or adding requested-via-BMO but never acquired. Well, QupZilla tries to offer such functionality (e.g., ad blocking) out of the box, either built-in or as extensions included with QupZilla. There may be some things missing in 2.0.x, which is the first release series for QtWebEngine, but both QtWebEngine and QupZilla are getting new features over time. It is also possible to develop third-party extensions against QupZilla, so if you are missing some functionality, it can be implemented, and then submitted for inclusion with QupZilla itself. Are there any concrete extensions that you (or other users here) would like? > I'd never opened QupZilla before now. Opened in F24 without making any > attempt to locate or install any option, plugins, extensions, etc., I > don't see anything but disadvantages compared to FF, and very little to > recommend it over Chromium: > http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/Fedora/ff45vqz201chr52-f24-120.jpg > > 1-Like other non-Gecko, non-KHTML browsers, both cannot be made to obey > DPI (meaning accurate physical sizes in their viewports are impossible > unless the displays' physical DPI is exactly 96). That is really a flaw in the HTML 5 spec, it is not fair to blame the browser for it. > 2-Abundant space wasted wasted making tabs easy to close by accident in > both. IMHO, having the tab close button on the tab is much more intuitive UI. And whether you like it or not, it is also the way Breeze tabs are supposed to look like (UI consistency). > 3-Main menubar is undiscoverable in both. Doesn't Firefox default to the same UI solution (popup menu button) these days? You probably have a very old Firefox profile. Please compare default settings. QupZilla has a preference to enable the traditional menu bar. If there is consensus that this should be the way it should look, I can enable it by default in our package. (I also prefer the traditional menu bar, and it is consistent with most other applications, though the popup button disease is slowly spreading.) It is just a boolean option to flip. > 4-Search bar is too narrow in both. Of your 3 screenshots, QupZilla is the only one whose search bar is easily discoverable. Firefox hides it in the menu bar (!!!) (that's a VERY non- standard UI; and is this even the default setting to begin with?), and Chromium hides it I don't know where (it's the worst). Still, sadly, none of the 3 can compete with Konqueror's convenient web shortcuts feature that allowed to search with arbitrary search engines directly from the location bar (e.g., gg:foo). (That said, if you enter something that is not a URL into QupZilla's location bar, it will by default search for it in the default search engine. This behavior can be disabled in the preferences.) It should not be too hard to add web shortcuts to the QupZilla code though, if one of us is bored. :-) Given that it's Qt-based, you can probably just port the code from Konqueror, including the configuration UI. But for now, this is not an argument for any of the 3 options, given that they all don't support it. > 5-UI text is not black (as is FF in obeying Plasma desktop settings) in > QZ. > > 6-UI text font family is not as specified in Plasma's desktop settings > (seems to be Oxygen rather than Droid) in QZ. For 5, you mean bold, right? These are both the same issue. Somehow, font settings are not being picked up. This is a bug somewhere. I'll look into it. Either QupZilla hardcodes something, or the Plasma platform plugin for Qt is getting something wrong. It is clearly not what should happen. > 7-QZ Sticks new "hidden" directories in $HOME at top by capitalizing first > letters. That's because the browser is called "QupZilla", not "qupzilla". :-) Also, blame your file manager that sorts case-sensitively. That said, the stuff should probably be put into something like ~/.local/share these days. I'll take that up with upstream. > 8-Scrollbar is too narrow in both. This is a matter of taste. > 9-Same minimalist inadequately emboldened stick-figure icons as displeases > me about Plasma 5 generally, though arguably better than the barely big > enough to target FF native icons. If you change your Plasma icon theme (e.g., to Oxygen), QupZilla will pick that up (unless it is affected by the same bug as the fonts). The default "Linux" theme uses system icons, not hardcoded ones. > 10-QZ (only) misreports window width. That's an interesting bug, it should be filed upstream. (It's clearly a bug.) > 11-Chrom's urlbar text is too small. Indeed. QupZilla's is not. :-p > 12-Text size buttons missing in both. Most people do not use those, except by accident. > If the best user experience is really the goal, FF with a theme custom > made for Plasma and Fedora is probably the best target to shoot for. A theme cannot solve integration issues such as non-native file dialogs. > In any event, under this roof, usability trumps appearance always. #1 > alone is enough to shoot down anything running on WebKit or Blink engines. > The only times I've ever opened Chrom* is to compare behavior to other > browsers. Too much functionality is missing to use either it for normal > browsing. QZ doesn't look much better. You are the only one who cares about #1. The HTML 5 spec says that browsers should behave the "wrong" way, so that's just how things are these days. I don't see how that should be the reason to pick a browser over another. If you really care that much about the DPI issue, I am looking forward to your QtWebEngine patch that implements it (optionally of course, or you break HTML 5 standard compliance). :-p Kevin Kofler _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
