El lun, 19-01-2015 a las 18:58 -0600, Michael Catanzaro escribió: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Martin Robinson > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think in this case, it makes sense for Epiphany to simply use > > Enchant to look for missing dictionaries. Installation of spelling > > dictionaries just seems out of scope for WebKit itself. --Martin > > I'm not sure I agree that it's out of scope for WebKit. Installation > of dictionaries is required to use the spell check feature, which is > already exposed in the API, so I think a desktop application would be > wrong to enable spell checking without providing some way to install > dictionaries (preferably automatically). In GNOME world, this is a > problem for Epiphany, Empathy, and Evolution, so I'm inclined to push > as much of this into WebKit as possible, so that other apps can make > use of it too, and leave just the UI to applications.
I think applications should only allow to set languages that are supported, and I agree that enchant is an implementation detail, so having a method to return the list of available languages, would allow applications to build a languages dialog with only the supported languages. The apps are free to allow the user to install new dictionaries to make more languages available. > > But if this is out of scope for WebKit, then I don't mind implementing > it in Epiphany instead. It's awkward for apps to use Enchant directly, > since that should be an implementation detail of WebKit, but > dictionaries are also supposed to be an implementation detail, so > using Enchant is not any worse than > webkit_web_context_get_available_spell_checking_languages() would be. > In this case, I would just want to add documentation to > webkit_web_context_set_spell_checking_languages() to explain that the > app is responsible for dictionary installation. I prefer if the applications do the installation thing, but I see the point of making that available for all apps for free by doing it in WebKit. And I guess it wouldn't add any dependency because we would use DBus to talk to PackageKit. But if we end up doing in in WebKit, I wonder if we really need new API for that. Couldn't we check the languages when they are set and talk to PackageKit for the ones not available? > > (You have definitely convinced me that my original proposal, > webkit_web_context_get_available_spell_checking_languages(), is not a > good idea -- at least not on its own.) Why? > > Cheers, > > > Michael > _______________________________________________ > webkit-gtk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-gtk -- Carlos Garcia Campos http://pgp.rediris.es:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF3D322D0EC4582C3
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ webkit-gtk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-gtk
