[ANN] Working SSL In Squeak

stephane ducasse <[hidden email]> writes:
> Excellent!
> You are given us a lesson of "Do-it"

Indeed.  great work!  -Lex

Lex Spoon skrev: I will look into these issues, and try to get Scamper to work properly
with 3.9
Karl
>
>
>  

On Oct 4, 2006, at 5:16 AM, Lex Spoon wrote:

Yeah, unfortunately there is no Monticello Browser in 3.7.  I found  
both in the 3.8 image, however.  Once I fixed the #asUrl logic to  
include https, I was able to load https pages.  But when I tried to  
login to my bank, to test https POST logic, the login button logic  
failed.  The FormInputSet had a form that was missing the url.  I  
couldn't dig too deeply.   I tried some other sites and they had  
difficulty even displaying the login button.  I am figuring that  
Javascript is an issue.  It was worth a try.

cheers,
Robert

You know, it would be extra cool if someone who is good at graphics  
and web stuff were to use the HtmlParser I wrote and build a proper  
renderer on top of it.  I think we have most of the pieces to do a  
workable web client (we only lack Javascript), just needs integration  
work and rendering.

Perhaps when I get down to one job again...

-Todd Blanchard

On Oct 4, 2006, at 12:19 PM, karl wrote:

Todd Blanchard skrev:
> You know, it would be extra cool if someone who is good at graphics
> and web stuff were to use the HtmlParser I wrote and build a proper
> renderer on top of it.  I think we have most of the pieces to do a
> workable web client (we only lack Javascript), just needs integration
> work and rendering.
>
> Perhaps when I get down to one job again...
>
I have tried to do a html table morph and have scratched my head
over all the quirks and loops one have to jump through. CSS I have not
looked at at all
but I guess the same problems will pop up. Automatic layout stuff is
really hard to get right.
I salute anyone who dare take on that beast
Karl

Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]> writes:
> You know, it would be extra cool if someone who is good at graphics
> and web stuff were to use the HtmlParser I wrote and build a proper
> renderer on top of it.  I think we have most of the pieces to do a
> workable web client (we only lack Javascript), just needs integration
> work and rendering.


As far as I know Scamper parses HTML just fine.  If you think not,
maybe lobby to get Scamper using your parser?  What is better about
it?


IMHO the next step for Scamper would be to implement a TableMorph and
then get Scamper to talk to it.  Just beware that people have tried
and then fizzled out.


Alternatively, there are always lurking options of trying to use
Mozilla code.  That way, you'd be really feature complete on whatever
parts you reused.  At the very least the pages would *look* nice.

-Lex

Lex Spoon skrev: I think the parser is fine and pretty easy to extend. The hard part is
whipping TextMorph, MorphicLayout and company into laying out the html
in a somewhat decent manner.
Karl

On Oct 9, 2006, at 11:23 AM, Lex Spoon wrote:

>
> As far as I know Scamper parses HTML just fine.  If you think not,
> maybe lobby to get Scamper using your parser?  What is better about
> it?

It understands CSS.
It understands DOCTYPEs
It understands W3C DOCTYPE definitions for the various HTML/
XHTMLstandards and can use them to guess about and recover from  
malformed HTML.  It can download new DOCTYPES and use them. This  
makes it somewhat future proof.

It has support for more modern tags like DIV and SPAN (missing in  
Scamper).

The only thing it is missing to be on par with modern browser like  
Firefox is Javascript support - which could be added either via a  
SpiderMonkey plugin, or a native JS interpreter, and plugin support.

HTML has changed a lot in the last few years and I don't think  
Scamper has kept up, which is why I started from scratch when I wrote  
the parser used to do http://badpage.net.  I did look at what was  
available first.

-Todd Blanchard

Todd Blanchard skrev: This sounds good :-)

>
> The only thing it is missing to be on par with modern browser like
> Firefox is Javascript support - which could be added either via a
> SpiderMonkey plugin, or a native JS interpreter, and plugin support.
>
> HTML has changed a lot in the last few years and I don't think Scamper
> has kept up, which is why I started from scratch when I wrote the
> parser used to do http://badpage.net.  I did look at what was
> available first.
Sounds like building Scamper on top of your parser is a good idea.
Karl
>
> -Todd Blanchard
>
>
>
>