Greetings!
This was fixed here:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41774
The change was too late for Qt 4.7 but will be part of the upcoming
QtWebKit 2.1 release.
-Kling
___
webkit-qt mailing list
webkit-qt@lists.webkit.org
On 09/13/2010 10:55 AM, ext chunrong lai wrote:
I see that section 6.2 of The 'box-shadow' property in
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-background/#the-box-shadow says the
third length as a blur distance is defined. When I tested
http://webkit.org/blog/86/box-shadow/ I saw it is not supported.
This
On 11/05/2010 07:51 AM, ext Tony Zhang wrote:
Can anyone show me some information on What caused QPainter:: Painter
not active problem after long time running?
Howdy!
I recognize this problem, and believe it was fixed in r69779:
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/69779
Please try with that
On 11/20/2010 01:20 AM, ext Baldeva, Arpit wrote:
I was able to build both Windows and QtWebKit port locally by following
build instruction for both. However, it seems that somehow my build
environment is corrupt. For example, running
WebKit/WebKitTools/Scripts/build-webkit fails with an error
On 11/20/2010 01:29 AM, ext Baldeva, Arpit wrote:
What I am saying is that right now, I am not even trying to build the Qt port.
I am trying to build Windows port (running
WebKit/WebKitTools/Scripts/build-webkit without any arguments). However, my
build fails complaining about qmake. So
On 11/20/2010 08:42 AM, ext Gary.Wzl wrote:
Browser based on Qt port of webkit (qt demo browser or arora )can't be dragged
google map when webpage is loaded properly.
http://code.google.com/intl/zh-CN/apis/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/index.html
Qt version is 4.7.0
Looks like it's
On 12/17/2010 06:54 PM, ext henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
You possibly had discussed that, but why not make 2.2 to be 2.1, since
the later is not release yet.
QtWebKit 2.2 is indeed a bit confusing name for the branch that Ademar just
created. It could be called 2.1.1 (or something like
On 02/02/2011 07:56 PM, ext Benjamin Poulain wrote:
-2.1 has not been tested on Qt 4.8, nor on the tier 1 platforms of Qt.
So I don't see why it is relevant in the first place.
Good point. The majority of the cost of a release lies in testing it,
and AFAIK testing of 2.1 on platforms other
Heyo everyone,
In preparing for the Qt 4.8 release, I will be removing support for
building QtWebKit trunk against Qt 4.6, as we normally only support the
latest two Qt versions.
Are there any objections to this?
Hugs such!
-Kling
___
webkit-qt
On 02/22/2011 06:23 PM, ext Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
22.02.2011, 20:15, Andreas Klingandreas.kl...@nokia.com:
Heyo everyone,
In preparing for the Qt 4.8 release, I will be removing support for
building QtWebKit trunk against Qt 4.6, as we normally only support the
latest two Qt versions.
Are
On 02/23/2011 01:41 AM, ext achellies wrote:
Hi, Is there any release notes for the QT 4.8?
No, Qt 4.8 is not ready yet, so there are no release notes. :)
-Kling
___
webkit-qt mailing list
webkit-qt@lists.webkit.org
Hiya!
3d transforms are only supported when using QGraphicsWebView, not QWebView.
-Kling
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 4:32 AM, Chengwei Wu meegodeve...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all:
I build qtwebkit 2.1 on meego-tablet image, and then run QtTestBrowser to
load the demo
Hello QtWebKit users and contributors!
Now that the Nokia N9 has finally been announced, many of you probably know
it ships with a WebKit2-based browser. Following this we've started
discussing where to go with WebKit in Qt5, and it has become quite clear
that the future of QtWebKit is with
what will be the alternative method
of QtWebkit-Bridge or Hybrid application development?
Thanks,
Sunny.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Andreas Kling kl...@webkit.org wrote:
Hello QtWebKit users and contributors!
Now that the Nokia N9 has finally been announced, many of you probably
Hey Sunny,
It's indeed an issue of resources, if your company wants to contribute a
buildbot that would be fantastic!
-Kling
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:57 AM, sunny shah sunny@gmail.com wrote:
Hi ,
@Ademar, Thanks for your response.
Can you please tell me, what is the reason behind
Heyo, interesting topic!
In my opinion all QT_NO_* defines should be dropped from WebKit. I
believe QtWebKit is sufficiently complex that you shouldn't use it without a
fully-featured Qt.
For every additional build-time flag, the complexity matrix grows larger,
and we're not testing any of it
IIUC we need to expose the item inside the clipping viewport somehow if we
want to support anchoring e.g a gutter to the page item.
I'd also argue that the QWKPage name didn't make a great deal of sense
either. It was more of a catch-all class than anything.
-Kling
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:46
Hi Konstantin,
AFAIK there are currently no plans to branch a 2.3 release at Nokia since
everyone here is working on the upcoming Qt5/WebKit2 API's.
-Kling
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Konstantin Tokarev annu...@yandex.ruwrote:
Hi all,
Are there any plans on the next QtWebKit release?
18 matches
Mail list logo
