> >>Why not allow the user to choose his/her browser of choice ?
> >>With Netscape, Mozilla, the Gnome Help Browser, kfm, or even
> >>Lynx in an xterm as possible choices, I don't see any problem with this...
> >So Gimp help should be a set of HTML files and a small exec to launch the
> >preferred browser (calling process already running if needed, a la moz
> You beat me to it. I was about to suggest that the simplest solution is to
> create simple HTML files for use as help and let the user use whatever
> browser they prefer to use in order to view the help files. This is
> essentially what is done in a Windows based HTML editor known as
> Dreamweaver (as if you really care what a Windows program does :-).
It was never questioned that the Gimp help should be simple html files and I
wonder who ever said that the user will be tied to one browser to use the
It is true that there's not yet a possibility to specify a different browser,
but who has said that this can't be implemented...
The reason why we think that a gimp helpbrowser is important to have is that
it can and should be a very small and fast browser. Small doesn't only mean
memory footprint here, but also screen estate. I'm sure that a lot of people
will prefer the helpbrowser plug-in over the browser they use for the web or
the gnome-helpbrowser (which is much too fat for our needs).
Gimp should provide a simple helpbrowser so help is available for everyone.
I don't insist on using GtkXmHtml for it and will have a look into porting
the existing browser to GtkHtml. But anyway, we will have to find a solution
on how to integrate or distribute the HTML widget.
BTW: You can even know use Netscape to use the help: Just drag the page title
from the helpbrowser over into Netscape. Oops, I forgot you need the
helpbrowser for that ;-)
the user should be limited to