- From: J. Magalhães Cruz <jmcruz@fe.up.pt>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 19:33:12 +0000
- To: www-amaya@w3.org
- Cc: Irene.Vatton@inrialpes.fr
> Amaya is mainly an editor with some browsing features. > The feature you requested takes less importance in that context. > Of course that the Amaya developing team has all the right in specifying what is and what is of no importance to the development of Amaya, in spite of what Irene said a few weeks ago: «I let people decide what is good for us.» ;-) The excuse of Amaya being mainly an HTML editor has been given many times. And I admit it is more than an excuse! It is a reason for doing one thing and for not doing the other. However, sometimes, I find difficult to understand how some suggested features are so easily accepted and quickly implemented, compared to others. For example, just a couple of weeks ago, someone suggested that Amaya should have an option for saving a file with CR+LF, instead of just LF. The Amaya team immediately accepted the suggestion and promised the feature for the next version! Although this is really on the editor side of Amaya, it is a completely unnecessary feature (by Jove, who still uses notepad?...) Back to the present issue. My interest in Amaya is that it is both an (WYSIWYG) editor and a browser. A request such as the present, regarding the usability of Amaya as a browser, seems to me very reasonable! Why do you find it so uninteresting to so quickly dismiss the idea? (I would accept more easily an answer such as: "Changing the rendering buffering system is far to hard to implement at present, and can not be considered a priority, considering that Amaya is primarily an editor tool". At one point I have to agree: the Amaya team should really endeavour to make Amaya a USEFUL and STABLE editor, as soon as possible, and not waste time with absolutely useless features! Keep up the work José On Friday 09 November 2001 13:07, Irene Vatton wrote: > Hi Julian, > > Amaya is mainly an editor with some browsing features. > The feature you requested takes less importance in that context. > > > Hi, > > > > My apologies if this subject has been discussed before, or if the > > behaviour I'm about to describe is by design, but the archive search > > doesn't appear to be working at the moment. > > > > I notice that Amaya, and at least one other browser (IE 5.5) seem to > > delay rendering a new page until a certain number of bytes have been > > received. > > > > If you have a dynamic page that outputs (streams?) small chunks of data > > at intervals, it can take a very long time before you see anything. As a > > nasty yet practical solution, I simply pad the page out to the required > > size by putting useless junk into meta tags, and bingo, the page loads > > instantly and I get to see the events rendered as they arrive. > > > > At least one version of Netscape, and of Opera are able to render > > immediately a page that is dynamically outputting small amounts of data. > > IE 5.5 only exhibits the delay when coming to the page from another > > page.. strangely it renders the events immediately if a refresh is done. > > So IE behaves a little better than Amaya in this regard, also it's buffer > > appears to be in the order of 300 - 400 bytes as opposed to a whopping > > 1k. > > > > Anyway, it strikes me that unless you want to encourage people like me to > > do ghastly things like padding headers to make these sorts of pages > > snappier - then buffering so much data before rendering is something that > > should be avoided. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Julian -- J. Magalhães Cruz --- jmcruz@fe.up.pt ---
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 14:34:36 UTC