On 02/20/2010 03:43 PM, Frank Karlitschek wrote:

Its user interface also strays far from the path established by our other standard applications and the HIG. You're going to have to make a good case for why our interface standards are not supposed to apply to our default web browser.

The rendering engine is irrelevant. WebKit can also be used in Konqueror. KHTML, on the other hand - an important compo- nent of the KDE Platform - presently cannot be used in Re- konq, as far as I know. For me that puts Konqueror ahead of Rekonq in the "rendering engine" department: It can use both engines.

I think that web browsers are hard. Web browsers have a very long tail of edge cases they need to handle well, and I'm not talking about the rendering engine. Accumu- lating solutions for these edge cases takes years. While other people may see a problem in the age of the Kon- queror codebase, in truth it represents tremendous value that we shouldn't throw away. Not to mention the many features Konqueror currently has that Rekonq doesn't have, many of which would likely have to be added back on user demand down the line - it's a duplication of effort.

If we're unhappy with Konqueror's state, then we should renew our investment of time and effort in Konqueror and shape it into what we need it to be.