hiro/tridactyl
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/vale981/tridactyl synced 2025-03-05 09:31:41 -05:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Move standalone notes out of design.md.

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Colin Caine 2017-02-24 18:37:35 +00:00
parent 4bc9b955c6
commit d3c63f2560
2 changed files with 45 additions and 45 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

46
design.md
View file

@ -27,51 +27,7 @@ Prior art:
* pentadactyl/vimperator - dying with XUL
* cVim/vimium
* vimfx - transitioning to WebExtensions, but no ex commands
* qutebrowser/jumanji - see standalone route.
## Standalone route
Some small browsers exist that use webkit/webengine for the heavy lifting. Two notable examples even have vim-like interfaces: qutebrowser and jumanji.
Extending them *might* be easy, depending on the quality of the existing code base. We also need to evaluate these projects for maintainability: they're obviously going to have much less development power.
If it's comparable to this project done in webextensions, then we might want to just build our own/fork/contribute.
But what do we lose? What do the non-gecko bits of firefox do? What's left in the chrome repo if you remove webengine? I don't really know.
* Kerning/font presentation code? (text in qutebrowser looks bad on Windows, don't know why)
* Cross-platform OS shit
* Firefox sync is neat and would be missed.
* safebrowsing?
* how much security stuff in engine/vs browser?
* webm, webgl and similar? Presumably handled either by the engine or externally, but maybe picking and maintaining link to external thing is expensive.
* flash handling?
* What UI stuff are we not replacing?
* developer tools (neat, but no reason for us to re-implement).
We also lose access to the existing addon/extension repos. Maybe if we implemented webextension support in our own browser we'd get them back? Don't know how difficult that is.
### A life without the addon store:
What addons do I use and would I miss them?
Should be part of the browser anyway:
* stylish --> :style, or maybe .vimperator/styles/ (with magic comments?)
* greasemonkey --> builtin/extensions/autocmds
* site blocker --> /etc/hosts
Maybe not:
* element hiding rules (ublock) not supported
* tree tabs --> better :buffer?
* lazarus form recovery is brilliant...
* noscript is shit anyway
* hide fedora is neat, but maybe just an element hiding list? Maybe it does have to parse differently.
* example of neat addon that a smaller browser wouldn't have available, anyway.
* ref control is neat, but the UI is pants. Would be easy to build an ex-mode interface.
* pwgen is trivial
* https everywhere --> builtin?
* qutebrowser/jumanji - see [standalone.md](standalone.md).
## WebExtension option

44
standalone.md Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
## Standalone route
Some small browsers exist that use webkit/webengine for the heavy lifting. Two notable examples even have vim-like interfaces: qutebrowser and jumanji.
Extending them *might* be easy, depending on the quality of the existing code base. We also need to evaluate these projects for maintainability: they're obviously going to have much less development power.
If it's comparable to this project done in webextensions, then we might want to just build our own/fork/contribute.
But what do we lose? What do the non-gecko bits of firefox do? What's left in the chrome repo if you remove webengine? I don't really know.
* Kerning/font presentation code? (text in qutebrowser looks bad on Windows, don't know why)
* Cross-platform OS shit
* Firefox sync is neat and would be missed.
* safebrowsing?
* how much security stuff in engine/vs browser?
* webm, webgl and similar? Presumably handled either by the engine or externally, but maybe picking and maintaining link to external thing is expensive.
* flash handling?
* What UI stuff are we not replacing?
* developer tools (neat, but no reason for us to re-implement).
We also lose access to the existing addon/extension repos. Maybe if we implemented webextension support in our own browser we'd get them back? Don't know how difficult that is.
### A life without the addon store:
What addons do I use and would I miss them?
Should be part of the browser anyway:
* stylish --> :style, or maybe .vimperator/styles/ (with magic comments?)
* greasemonkey --> builtin/extensions/autocmds
* site blocker --> /etc/hosts
Maybe not:
* element hiding rules (ublock) not supported
* tree tabs --> better :buffer?
* lazarus form recovery is brilliant...
* noscript is shit anyway
* hide fedora is neat, but maybe just an element hiding list? Maybe it does have to parse differently.
* example of neat addon that a smaller browser wouldn't have available, anyway.
* ref control is neat, but the UI is pants. Would be easy to build an ex-mode interface.
* pwgen is trivial
* https everywhere --> builtin?