[webkit-gtk] WebKit2 API and Injected Bundle support

Xan xan.lopez at gmail.com
Sun May 20 20:25:29 PDT 2012


On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Carlos Garcia Campos <cgarcia at igalia.com> wrote:
> My main concern is that we might end up implementing an extension system
> or wrapping an entire API that nobody is going to use eventually. So, I
> prefer to start with a simpler option that would allow us to implement
> the complex one in the future if it's really needed. We won't know until
> we start porting more applications that use more extensively the current
> WebKit1 API. So, for now I think the best option is the second one,
> leaving it open to implement 3 in the future if required by apps.

Given your explanation it also seems to me that going for option 2 as
we develop the API seems like the most sensible choice. It seems to me
a good way of figuring out if it's going to be enough for advanced
users would be to see how you'd implement all the DOM API usages in
Epiphany with 2 (or 3, if it comes to that). If you can do all that
without having to expose the entire thing I'd feel confident about us
being able to cover most advanced use cases.

I'm particularly curious about whether it would be possible to deliver
a simple extension mechanism that does not require exposing vast
amounts of extra API that will be rarely used. Perhaps as you suggest
using the C-API when possible would be the best choice.


> Opinions?
> --
> Carlos Garcia Campos
> http://pgp.rediris.es:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF3D322D0EC4582C3
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-gtk mailing list
> webkit-gtk at lists.webkit.org
> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-gtk

More information about the webkit-gtk mailing list