QTextBrowser promises to render rich text - isn’t it what we want for showing 
help? If QTextBrowser isn’t able to render properly the static help files - 
what is the other typical usage of it? Why we claim that QTextBrowser is able 
to do things, which in fact it can't? This doesn't show a fair message to the 
user, if we - for our purposes - don't use tools which we should.

In webkit times I was able to open my bank online page from Assistant, but I 
wasn’t brave enough to log into my account. Do we really want help viewer to be 
full functional web browser? Big companies work hard for a very long time to 
design GUIs, menus, interactions, and we give the people barely the web window? 
I remember how I was confused when I could open my preferred online newspaper 
in Assistant in that time - it looked super unprofessional, without proper, 
typical GUI for web browsers around. Do we still want to pass the same 
impression to our customers?

IMO, we should make a clear requirements on what we want and what we don’t want 
for help viewer. There is no need for networking, means we even shouldn’t try 
to compile it against network module. Turning the networking functionality at 
runtime is not enough. We should make a clear separation, on what the viewer 
should support (like html, css), what it may potentially support in the future 
(we ensure we don’t close the door, e.g. playing offline videos), and what it 
shouldn’t support, never (networking, javascript (???), much more...). We 
should define it first and than choose the right solution. Not like: let’s 
choose webengine, it may do everything. Currently it looks like the webengine 
supports everything and it’s way too much.

In addition, I really don’t like the super fast decisions here. It’s easy to 
say: let’s use webengine, and after we release we will see if more or less 
people complain. Many things may be predicted now. It is a bit like: Would you 
use webengine to implement Qt’s "Hello World" example? One can say: why not, 
web engine may do much more! Is it a way we want to show our users on how to 
use Qt? We could even exchange the implementation of QLabel and use webengine 
for it... Less maintenance, smaller codebase, etc... Sound cosmic? Yeah, 
webengine in Assistant too...

Regarding Kavindra’s message, about not fixing QTextBrowser for years: yes, we 
were probably not having resources to do it so far. So, does that mean we 
should choose the bad further ways as a consequence? Isn’t it now the right 
time to address such long lasting issues? Would it be more interesting for 
users, that in Qt 6 the QTextBrowser is redesigned and can do much more than 
his old brother from Qt 5, instead of e.g. wondering for couple of years 
whether QList should be replaced / renamed / whatever by / to / ... QVector? I 
bet we would gain much more by enhancing QTextBrowser.

Does anyone still cares about what is the right way to do the stuff versus what 
is the fastest and easiest way to make a patch just to make some crying 
customers silent for a minute? Are we still pragmatic? I understand we aim with 
the solution for Qt 6 in any case. I imagine that making webengine pluggable / 
customizable / configurable (so that we even don't compile the stuff we don't 
want) won’t be possible in this timeframe - so, would we have enough time / 
resources to address much more easier changes in QTextBrowser, which would be 
really interesting for broad customer audience? Or we choose the easiest, 
crappy way (sorry for that, it’s just a quotation from this thread) and we just 
advertise it well enough? I bet smart developers (read: the users, which decide 
on whether to use or not to use the certain functionality of Qt in their 
projects) easily differentiate between a good change and a good ad.

Regards

Jarek

PS. Kavindra, yes, the goal of this thread is to address your issues. But 
please, let’s consider all the technical possibilities, before the decision on 
which way to choose is made. And please don’t stop considering changes in 
QTextBrowers, just because noone fixed it so far (for many years). It would be 
really handy if we have a bugreport with exact description of which html tags / 
attributes / css are broken in QTextBrowser. It would give an overview of how 
much needs to be done there. The evidence like: we tried before and failed, 
doesn't tell too much.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to