Re: LIBWWW SURVEY

In message LIBWWW SURVEY
      jose.kahan@w3.org wrote:

> =====================================
>              LIBWWW SURVEY
> =====================================
> 
> Opens: September 22, 2000
> Ends:  October 6, 2000
> Goal:  Get a clear idea of what the libwww user community would like to
>        do with libwww
> Means: Mail your responses to this form to www-lib-survey@w3.org
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [1.0] Who are you and how do you use libwww
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [1.1] Do you develop or have developed applications that use libwww
> 
> [o] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> If you didn't answer yes to [1.1], go to section 2.
> 
> [1.2] What kind of application (you may cite the name too, if you want)

I'm developing a mobile Web browser using libwww.
(a testbed for CC/PP)

> [1.2] On which platform and environment (mark all that apply)
> 
> [o] X-Windows
> [o] Unix (includes Linux, Solaris, ...)

FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris

> [ ] Win32
> [o] GTK
> [ ] Others (please cite): 
> 
> [1.3] Which language(s) did you use
> 
> [o] C
> [ ] C++
> [o] Others (please cite):

Perl. 

> [1.4] How do you rate your programming skills
> 
> [ ] Experience programmer
> [o] Average programmer
> [ ] Beginner

Maybe between 'experience' and 'average'.

> [1.5] What parts of libww do you use
> 
> [ ] XML parser
> [ ] RDF parser
> [ ] HTML parser
> [o] HTTP 
> [o] FTP
> [ ] News
> [ ] Telnet
> [ ] Gopher
> [ ] SSL
> [ ] Others (please cite):

I have also used XML and HTML parsers before, but now
I switched them to my own parsers.

> [1.6] What applications of libwww do you use
> 
> [o] Examples
> [ ] Robot
> [ ] LineMode parser
> [ ] Command line parser
> [ ] WinCommander
> 
> [1.7] What modifications do you make to the code before you use it?

I made a tiny patch for FILE protocol (it was commited now),
which was the only modification I have made.

> [1.8] If you have any tests for libwww code, what parts of libwww
>       do you test and are you willing to contribute the tests to
>       the W3C?

Sorry, but I couldn't get how do you mean by 'test'...

> [1.9] Anything else you'd like to say
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [2.0] Your opinion of libwww
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [2.1] In your opinion, libwww is (check all that apply):
> 
> [o] useful to write sample code
> [ ] useful for learning how to program a WWW application
> [sometimes] useful to write production code
> [ ] Other: please cite
> 
> [2.2] Do you find it useful that libwww is written in C
> 
> [o] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [2.3] Please explain your previous answer
> 
> [2.4] Do you feel that libwww too big?
> 
> [ ] Yes
> [o] No

I don't think it is too big, but it often forces
application programmers to obey its policies,
and sometimes it is annoying.

> [2.5] If so, which parts would you like to remove, or move to other libraries
> 
> [2.6] What are the things that you like the most of libwww

For some typical applications, there are very useful and graceful
profiles, so that we can program such kinds of applications easily.

> [2.7] What are the things that you dislike the most of libwww

Incomplete memory frameworks, tightly coupled with unclearly layered
upcall systems.
Also the libwww's EventLst system seems not to have enough
scalability for productive applications.

> [2.8] What are the things that you would like to change in libwww
>
> [2.9] What are the things you think that libwww are missing

Multi-thread support, and
flexible and functional event handlings.

> [2.10] Anything else you'd like to say
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Section 3: The future
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [3.1] Let's continue with libwww
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [3.1.1] Do you think it's worth it to have a WWW library?
> 
> [o] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [3.1.2] Do you know of any other similar libraries (please give a URL to
>         the project if possible)

No.
But I have borrowed several HTTP codes from wget
(<URL:http://sunsite.auc.dk/ftp/pub/infosystems/wget/>) before,
and it was very handy and easy to modify.
(though it does not support HTTP/1.1 pipeline functionalities)

> [3.1.2] Do you think it's worth it to invest time continuing enhancing
>         libwww and its architecture.
> 
> [maybe] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [3.1.3] Are you interested in joining the core team of such a project 
>         (enhancing libwww)?
> 
> [o] Yes
> [ ] No

I think I'm interested and will be able to help something to enhance
libwww, but I'm afraid I don't have enough time to spend for...

> [3.1.4]  If you are willing to write some new documentation or improve
>          existing documentation, which topics are you willing to document?
> 
> [3.1.5] Anything else you'd like to say
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [3.4] Let's invest our forces enhancing an existing project
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [3.4.1] Do you think it's better to enhance another existing project (i.e.,
>         merge our efforts)
> 
> [3.4.2] Are you interested in joining the core team of such a project
>         (enhancing an existing project)?
> 
> [ ] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [3.4.3] Anything else you'd like to say
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [3.5] Let's write it again
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [3.5.1] Do you think the project should stop and start again from a clean
>         slate?
> 
> [o] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [3.5.2] Which language would you use and why (please take into account
>         portability among systems)?

If we need a library written in C (and I think so),
libwww may have to be re-written in a more *C-like* style
than a current odd semi-OO style.
But many of Win32 users will want a more sophisticated library
written in C++ (or C#?).

> [3.5.3] Are you interested in joining the core team of such a project 
>         (starting a new libwww project)?
> 
> [a little] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [3.6] Where to host it
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [3.6.1] Should W3C continue hosting libwww or any other spin-off projects?
> 
> [ ] Yes
> [ ] No
>
> [3.6.2] SourceForge (SF): How would feel if the W3C transferred libwww to a 
>         SF project?

maybe.

> [3.6.3] Are you currently involved with any SF projects?
> 
> [ ] Yes
> [o] No
> 
> [3.6.4] If so, do you think libwww would fit into that developement paradigm?
> 
> [ ] Yes
> [ ] No
> 
> [3.6.5] Do you have other suggestions of where libwww should be hosted?
> 
> [3.6.6] Anything else you'd like to say
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [4.0] Your comments
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> [4.1] Anything else you'd like to say

Jose,
I haven't answer your question on ML yet (though you probably do not
remember the question)... Currently I'm involved in a W3C related
project at Keio, and I am cooperating with the members of Keio W3C
team to develop some open source softwares, e.g. a CC/PP capable browser.

Thank you.
(sorry for my English)

--
kinuko

Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2000 03:51:04 UTC