El Dissabte, 20 d'abril de 2013, a les 18:07:20, Jaydeep Solanki va escriure: > I would go for webkit, because as HTML develops webkit developers will > improve it where as in QTextDocument case it's not sure that it will come > up with the latest standards. Or if we try to improve it and maintain it, > the maintenance load will increase. > Also I looked at other ePub viewers such as calibre and it too uses webkit. > > I did some tests and webkit seems to be working out of the box.
What do you mean with "some tests"? > BTW, I had a doubt, as currently every generator gives a QTextDocument, do > we have to change all of the generators to make it work with webkit, or > just the specific ePub one ? What do you think? Cheers, Albert > > Cheers, > Jaydeep > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > > El Dijous, 18 d'abril de 2013, a les 23:49:00, Jaydeep Solanki va escriure: > > > Incase my previous mail didn't reach you because of heavy attachment, > > > > here > > > > > is another one. > > > Hello, > > > I would be really happy if you can review the proposal that I have > > > > created. > > > > > Proposal link : http://db.tt/7pynIIKN > > > > Looks correct, one way of improving it would be doing some of the > > preliminary > > work to see if you'd prefer to go the QTextDocument or the Wekbit route. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Albert > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Jaydeep Solanki > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Okular-devel mailing list > > Okular-devel@kde.org > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/okular-devel _______________________________________________ Okular-devel mailing list Okular-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/okular-devel