Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply, I did not notice that you had answered.
>
>>> I did not file the feature request on Dolphin as I see that Konqueror
>>> does have sessions. What, specifically, do you feel could be improved?
>>>
>> Konqueror View Profiles contain a configuration of Konqueror and
>> optionally can contain stored URLs. Perhaps some of the problem could
>> be attributed to bugs. Specifically, the number of open tabs and window
>> divisions seems to be part of the configuration of Konqueror even if the
>> View Profile does not contain URLs. If that bug were fixed, the current
>> system might be OK. However, it appears to me that saving a
>> configuration and saving content [URL(s)] should be two separate actions
>> and the option should be whether to attach a configuration to content
>> (currently even if the bugs are fixed, this is required). A
>> configuration does need a default URL to use when a new instance opens,
>> but this should not override content already opened in a Konqueror instance.
>>
>
> Specifically, the change that you are asking for is that one could
> open a profile of tabs in addition to (as opposed to replacing) the
> current tabs?
>
I hadn't though of that. What I would say is no, if you opened a URL
Profile (no configuration) it would replace the tabs currently opened.
But, you may have a point there.
>> I would take this one step further. Although we would probably have to
>> allow named configurations, I would also make it possible to create
>> automatic configurations that were associated with one or more protocols
>> so that the configuration would automatically change based on the
>> protocol of the URL that currently had focus. We already have something
>> similar; you will notice that some of the icons on the toolbars appear
>> and disappear based on the content type of the URL that has focus.
>>
>
> Be very specific, this may be possible.
>
I figured that the default configuration (Default_Browser) would cover
all of the protocols
>> This could be used to eliminate the need for the artificial division
>> into "Web Browsing" and "File Management". The universal browser is a
>> feature of KDE, I do not understand what motivated the attempt to create
>> the false separation, but then there a lot of things about the KDE
>> project that I don't understand.
>>
>
> The universal browser is a feature of Konqueror, not KDE. And
> Konqueror isn't going anywhere!
>
If you want a detailed discussion of this, contact me off list.
--
JRT
Linux (mostly) From Scratch
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
