[wx-discuss] wxWeb Port licensing and naming

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:17:21 -0700 John Wilmes <wilmesj at reed.edu> wrote:

JW> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:44:29 +0100, Julian Smart wrote:
JW> > I raised the possibilty of writing wxWeb as a wxUniversal port
...
JW> I've been thinking about this, and on the whole I think it's a great idea.

 It does sound appealing but I'm worried about the practical aspects. To
put it crudely, I'd prefer a simple but working port using the built in
widgets to a powerful and flexible wxUniversal port which doesn't work in
practice.

JW> Fortunately, a few other technologies exist, though none of them works
JW> on every browser. Things like SVG, VML, and the <canvas> HTML extension
JW> would all offer the functionality we need,

 I guess you could also include Flash in this list. But I wonder if this
would still be a Web port then at all. After all you should be able to
"run" it just inside Flash (SVG, ...) player and not web browser then. Of
course, maybe there is nothing wrong with this.


 IMO the ideal solution would be to start with a port using the native HTML
widgets (i.e. basically the elements allowed in HTML forms if I understand
correctly?) and add wxUniversal-like enhancement later for custom controls.
But a lot of useful applications can be written with standard controls
only so if you manage to make this work [well], it would be already great.
I'm still a bit in the dark about how exactly are all the pieces supposed
to fit together though, so maybe I'm missing something. It would be great
to have an overview of how wxWeb would work to make this discussion more
focused.

 Thanks,
VZ


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wx-discuss-unsubscribe at lists.wxwidgets.org
For additional commands, e-mail: wx-discuss-help at lists.wxwidgets.org