OK, sounds good.
Thanks for your patience.
-Darin
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Marshall Greenblatt wrote:
> Hi Darin,
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
>
>> Marshall,
>>
>> For now, can you just use NPObject to access the DOM? See WebBindings for
>> implementation o
Hi Darin,
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Darin Fisher wrote:
> Marshall,
> For now, can you just use NPObject to access the DOM? See WebBindings for
> implementation of NPRuntime methods.
>
> Long term, I am interested in reflecting the full DOM via the WebKit API,
> but I don't want to rush
Marshall,
For now, can you just use NPObject to access the DOM? See WebBindings for
implementation of NPRuntime methods.
Long term, I am interested in reflecting the full DOM via the WebKit API,
but I don't want to rush the design. At present, we are pretty busy just
trying to complete the core
Darin knows for sure, but I'm not aware of any intentions on Google's part
to engineer such an elaborate API. As long as it didn't add a
major maintenance burden (i.e. exposed things similar to one of the other
WebKit APIs) I'd imagine patches would be welcome though.
I believe only Darin can spea
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> It seems like we need to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, we'll
> end up exposing the whole DOM via the WebKit API. Where do you think
> the optimum cut-off is?
>
I think treating the DOM as an XML-ish object tree would be the most
reason
It seems like we need to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise, we'll
end up exposing the whole DOM via the WebKit API. Where do you think
the optimum cut-off is?
Adam
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Marshall Greenblatt
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The Chromium WebKit API does not currently provide a
