Re: Gmail, Konqueror, Firefox, and OSS
On 8/6/05, Allan Sandfeld Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please report problems to bugs.kde.org. Note that right now GMail works best > > when Konqueror uses a Firefox UA-string and then receives the same source as > > Firefox. Could you be a bit more specific? Which version konq and what is your uagent. I've tried konq-3.3.2 with ua mozilla-1.2.1 (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; en_US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130) and gmail says it's not fully supported .. but, ua mozilla-1.6 (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en_US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113) will show all functions like mozilla, but the labels don't activate when I click on them with the mouse. What is your successful setting? TIA
Re: Gmail, Konqueror, Firefox, and OSS
On Saturday 06 August 2005 05:20 am, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > Unfortunately Google is more or less unreachable. Even as KHTML developer > I've been unable to obtain any reply let alone help from Google. As much as Google depends on OSS, in light of the above statement, "Don't Be Evil" is starting to look pretty disingenuous. Douglas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gmail, Konqueror, Firefox, and OSS
On Friday 05 August 2005 20:55, Bob Tilley (AT&T) wrote: > Gmail is an oft-used, web-based, e-mail management system. The inner > workings of Gmail are proprietary but definately NOT standards-based. > > Firefox is an open source web browser that displays no problems, of which > the author is aware, interacting with Gmail. Anyone can view the workings > of this program. > > Konqueror is also an open source web browser that does display problems > interacting with Gmail. Specifically, in navigating to the Settings page. > Please report problems to bugs.kde.org. Note that right now GMail works best when Konqueror uses a Firefox UA-string and then receives the same source as Firefox. > Do the people currently working on the Gmail-compatibility of Konqueror > know this? They can compare the code for Firefox to the code for > Konqueror, note the differences and then transfer the Gmail-friendliness of > Firefox to Konqueror. > *strangled laugh* Short answer: Impossible > These may be obvious questions with even more obvious answers, but the > author of this e-mail doesn't know if the issue has ever been considered in > these terms. In no way am I trying to be rude, but only to understand. > The obvious answer is to write to Google and ask them to fully support Konqueror. While you are at it ask them to send Konqueror crap in Blogger, and add us to the list of working browsers in maps.google.com. Unfortunately Google is more or less unreachable. Even as KHTML developer I've been unable to obtain any reply let alone help from Google. `Allan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Gmail, Konqueror, Firefox, and OSS
On Friday 05 August 2005 11:55 am, Bob Tilley (AT&T) wrote: > Gmail is an oft-used, web-based, e-mail management system. The inner > workings of Gmail are proprietary but definately NOT standards-based. > > (snip) > GMail has worked fine in Konqueror since KDE 3.4.0. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gmail, Konqueror, Firefox, and OSS
Gmail is an oft-used, web-based, e-mail management system. The inner workings of Gmail are proprietary but definately NOT standards-based. Firefox is an open source web browser that displays no problems, of which the author is aware, interacting with Gmail. Anyone can view the workings of this program. Konqueror is also an open source web browser that does display problems interacting with Gmail. Specifically, in navigating to the Settings page. Do the people currently working on the Gmail-compatibility of Konqueror know this? They can compare the code for Firefox to the code for Konqueror, note the differences and then transfer the Gmail-friendliness of Firefox to Konqueror. These may be obvious questions with even more obvious answers, but the author of this e-mail doesn't know if the issue has ever been considered in these terms. In no way am I trying to be rude, but only to understand. Thanks, Bob -- The content of the message is a reflection only of the writer and not of AT&T or Tybrin. Robert Tilley 321-785-2010 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
