(another) WebKit port of Browse

[Carol Lerche]

The UI seems pretty important to me, but obviously that's a matter of
taste.  Not everyone likes tabbed browsing.  Correct operation of websites
that fail with the extant browser.  Direct availability of plugins and
addons.  One example:  scrapbook, a superb research tool.  Another example
Google Gears (according to a recent mail being ported, presumably  because
the browser is not standard).  I am not familiar with the Firefox codebase,
and perhaps all these things are directly available so long as the Firefox 3
engine is there, but if so, there desperately needs to be a detailed body of
documentation telling how to access these capabilities.

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Bobby Powers <bobbypowers at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2008/7/7 Carol Lerche <cafl at msbit.com>:
> > Client certs can be used for authentication with no changes to a Firefox
> > browser or an Apache server.  GTK based as well as web based software to
> > create certs also already exists.   What sort of patch are you looking
> for?
> > I could certainly provide a page running in an apache server to validate
> a
> > request for and implant a client cert in a Firefox browser.   The issue
> of
> > certificate creation needs a little more discussion, not because it is
> > difficult or requires a lot of new software to execute, but because it is
> > important to be clear about the requirements.  When you describe the
> > overhead, do you mean the overhead of creating the certs?  Examining them
> > when someone first logs on?
> >
> > I raised this alternative because you said that a bespoke browser was a
> > requirement to have automatic authentication with the school server.  To
> me,
> > the benefits of running a standard browser are so substantial that this
> > trade off should be considered.
>
> Can you explain these benefits?  Both Gecko and WebKit are standard
> browser engines.  I don't see much to be gained from a UI perspective
> (which presumably is what you're taking about?) by switching to FF3.
> Performance is the only compelling reason I see.
>
> Bobby
>
> > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 3:39 PM, Martin Langhoff <
> martin.langhoff at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Carol Lerche <cafl at msbit.com> wrote:
> >> > Why does automatic authentication require a custom browser?  Client
> >> > certificates work well for this function in ordinary web applications
> >> > (assuming a properly configured server).
> >>
> >> I haven't delved into this deeply yet, but I suspect that, while I am
> >> fond of client certs, they won't work - SSL network and CPU overhead
> >> and sidestepping PKI madness for server certs. More on this when I get
> >> to implement it.
> >>
> >> Now, anyone who wants to have a strong say on how I am developing this
> >> is free to start implementing it ahead of me, and showing me some
> >> fantastic patches :-)
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> m
> >> --
> >>  martin.langhoff at gmail.com
> >>  martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
> >>  - ask interesting questions
> >>  - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
> >>  - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on
> the
> > roof and gets stuck -- George Carlin
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel at lists.laptop.org
> > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
> >
> >
>



-- 
Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the
roof and gets stuck -- George Carlin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080707/dd437a44/attachment.html>