Le 26.10.2013 12:43, Reco a écrit :
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 12:18:44 +0200
berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
At the time I switched, there was a far better support for SVG in
opera. 3 years ago. It was the only browser able to render html into
svg, which is standard.
Hmm. Probably you have a valid point here. While usecase of
transforming html to svg is unclear to me, I can not find a way to do
it in Firefox.
Svg embedded in html worked OK in firefox back in 2006 and is still
here.
I can imagine various usage. At that time, I wanted to make a program
to generate collection cards, like what magic the gathering (tm) uses. I
thought that xml/xss was a good idea, because a very important part of
the design is common for all cards, with simply some textures and
symbols changing. So it could have been easy to build a card generator.
And, in fact, I think than I was wrong on my statement, on both the
feature which made me switching and the time. It could have been the svg
embedded (and so lot older than 3 years... I really have problems to see
years passing), because, I remember that even if opera had a better
support for mixing html/svg, it was not completely working according to
what w3c recommendations were saying.
Honestly I do not remember. I simply remember that it was the reason
for me to try opera, and that I sticked to it due to lot of details. I
think it was firefox 3.5, since it is the last one I remember. Few times
after, there were lot of efforts from mozilla to fix memory leaks and
other problems like that, IIRC.
I do not clearly remember.
I do not know about what inability to render
correctly you are speaking: I have seen that statement several
times,
but never noticed the problem myself.
SunFire X-series ILOM web-interface, for example. Unusable in opera.
IBM's HMC web-interface. Unusable in opera.
Anything based on Oracle's ADF will get you one big 'you're not
welcome
here, boo' if you use opera.
Sadly, some of us need to use browsers to do work, not to surf
Internets.
Indeed.
I do not have access to those pages, but by curiosity, how do they pass
the w3c validator? I know that not so many stuff pass it without
errors/warnings, but I am curious. Could it be a site's bug? ( no
trolling here, real question )
And I do not think it is because
webdev try opera, those who does are probably minority, since opera
is
not a mainstream browser, at least for desktop.
Ok, but. This implies that opera's implementation of HTML standard is
flawed somehow, as webpages require additional testing.
According to what I have read, they usually test their work for IE,
firefox and chrome. For old IE, it is well known fact that standard is
not respected. But FF and chrome do claim respecting it well, so why
testing in both?
I think ( only supposition here, web dev is not my field at all ) it's
because HTML standard is a little like C++ standard: it does not say how
things have to be implemented, only a "general description", if you see
what I mean. So it is needed to test on more than one implementation,
because behaviors and performances are not same everywhere.
Also, you can disable JS/plugins/cookies and other stuff on a
per-site
basis, unlike Firefox. I mean, without plug-ins, of course. This is
very
useful nowadays, with all those sites using JS for everything and
nothing.
True for JS, false for cookies. Right-clicking on the page in firefox
and choosing 'View Page Info' will lead one to a fancy per-site
control
for cookies and other stuff. Works out of the box.
Reco
I think plugins too can be, am I wrong? The point was that I feel like
I have more control on how behaves my browser with opera than with
firefox. But, to be honest, that JS option is not very nice to use in
opera, since you have to: right clic on site, edit website's
preferences, select script tab, check or uncheck the first checkbox
"enable JS", validate, and finally reload.
That could be better, like with a simple checkbox in bottom bar, but
nowadays browser are focusing on minimal interfaces... and opera
probably have one of the most "heavy" interfaces by default.
Actually a plug-in could probably give me a better interface even for
opera, but the option is natively here.
I say this only to show that even if I use opera, I am not a fanboy, it
have problems, indeed, but it have strong points for it, too. Some
features have since be copied by others ( I do not say it's bad, ideas
should not be patented, only their real implementations and only when
they are not trivial. Complex topic that I do not master. ) like opera
link, which allows to sync compatible browsers. I did not mentioned this
one because now, firefox have it (and allows user to chose it's server,
which is better).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/3a832e52ec765e55a359e5cdfb896...@neutralite.org
