[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm wondering if it's making getting too sophisticated. WinEmbed
> should be an example of how to embed mozilla in an another app, no
> more, no less.
IMO that's exactly what we're doing. "another app" (generally one that want's
browser capability) needs back/forward/stop/reload etc.
> I'm one of the people who are using mozilla strictly
> for XUL and a few other services. Until the XPFE team finishes
> creating a stand-alone build for this purpose, winembed is the best
> example of how to easily embed mozilla in an app. If winEmbed is
> going to become a fully functional web browser, we're going to need
> another separate example again of simply how to embed mozilla in an
> application.
I disagree. "embedding" will ultimately support being wrapped in a fulling
function web browser (say, some future version of Netscape for example).
Jud
>
>
> dave.
>
> Wednesday, December 13, 2000, 6:00:12 AM, you wrote:
>
> AL> I've just checked in a new version of winEmbed.
>
> AL> This new version makes it work more like a simple browser with
> AL> back/forward/stop/go buttons, an address field, status & progress bars,
> AL> more menu options and more "correct" implementations of the various
> AL> pieces of functionality. I've tried to ensure all code uses the "public"
> AL> embedding interfaces but there are still some bits that rely on the
> AL> "private" interfaces such as nsIDocShell & nsIContentViewer.
>
> AL> winEmbed is an ongoing piece of work so feel free to make suggestions.
