Talk:Browser engine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Terminology

It may be useful to render the reader aware of the fact that the terms "layout" and "rendering" are used in an overly broad meaning in this context.

A so called "layout engine" does in fact a lot more than layout. The basic tasks performed are: 1. document retrieval from the network 2. parsing 3. creation of the document tree 4. layout 5. rendering 6. event handling / scripting.

The layout proper is only the computation of the position of every graphical elements on the page. You find layout modules in a lot of programs, like EDA tools, TeX, graphviz, ...

The rendering proper is only the transformation of graphical objects (bitmap images, vector graphics, text) to a raster. Likewise, you'll find a renderer in a lot of programs, like ghostscript, flash, ...

What do you think ? Tonigonenstein 02:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree, and had gone to the talk page to make the same point made in your paragraph 3. Formerly the IP-Address 24.22.227.53 21:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

That might address a remark I was about to make. If this is about rendering marked up content, why is Ghostview not in the list? Or any dvi viewer? or a postscript or pdf viewer? Those all take a structured language as input, and render the result... I think that is clearly not what was intended, so can this please be clarified? Hugo, 212.66.88.6 (talk) 19:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I have taken the bold step of renaming this article to web browser engine, which is what it is really about. The term is how Webkit describes itself. I also explain in the article the difference between layout, rendering and web browser engines so that should solve the issue. Then articles for layout engines and rendering engines in general can be created and reference this one. Barsamin (talk) 01:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

"Web browser engine" is more general and descriptive of its purpose than "layout engine". I support the change unless someone comes up with a better terminology.
--Gyrobo (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I came to this page to find out which standards organization defines the web browser engine. I think it is WWWC, but am not 100% sure. I was surprised that it is such a small page and that it didn't identify the standards organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.232.66.237 (talk) 17:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The standards organization, the WWWC, defines HTML5, CSS3 and other standards. The browser layout engines attempt to implement the standards. LittleBen (talk) 05:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

If Layout Engine redirects here, where do I add information about thick client (non-web) layout engines?

I want to add content to Wikipedia about the differences between the thick client layout engines found in WinForms, WCF, Linux, Java, and other OS's. If we insist on redirecting "layout engine" to here, then where do I put it? It looks like there was already a discussion (link above) - did we decide to intentionally exclude the subject? Contrary to popular opinion, not all user interfaces are web-based. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.140.254 (talk) 19:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Statistics (combine Mozilla with Firefox?)

Is Wikimedia (name it Wikipedia per WP:COMMONNAME) data the best and representative?

See my latest edit to this page. See my section: Talk:Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Wikimedia_number_do_not_add_up_.28to_100.25.29. Please discuss there. Note that my latest edit here contradicts that page. comp.arch (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Layout engine stub

There appears to be a vary small stub article under the title Layout engine. This article (Web browser engine) asserts a "web browser engine" is sometimes called "layout engine". And if this is the only usage of the term layout engine then I suggest a deletion of the stub article. --Devin Murphy (talk) 19:02, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Article name

The name of the page has been "web browser engine" for years, which is consistent with the parent "web browser" page. However, User:C. A. Russell has twice moved it to "browser engine". I disagree with that. It should be consistent with the parent page. -Pmffl (talk) 15:35, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

On the other hand, I overlooked the fact that there is precedent for pages named Browser extension, Browser security, etc. So, in that sense, "Browser engine" is acceptable, though I have a personal preference for the fuller name. -Pmffl (talk) 15:49, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

While doing some major revision work today, the new "browser engine" name grew on me. It occurred to me that it may, in fact, be better to differentiate it even more from the parent "web browser" page. So I'm fine with the new name. -Pmffl (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Since there's no disagreement anymore, I'm going to change other pages to use the new "browser engine" name. -Pmffl (talk) 22:56, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Flow engine

In the past few days, two editors have added the Flow browser engine under the Notable engines section. I reverted it, citing that it's too new, in an alpha state. Recent articles support this:

"Ekioh hopes that Flow will start showing up in actual products later this year, but anyone can play around with it on a Raspberry Pi right now."

"This web browser you’ve never heard of is absolutely rapid, but don’t get too excited."

Thus it doesn't yet belong in the Notable engines section. Perhaps it will succeed and warrant inclusion, but it's too early to determine that now. -Pmffl (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Best to create a separate list of engines and put it there.--AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 10:45, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

That already exists - see the Comparisons article. For this article's section, I removed the minor Goanna engine today. Only the most historically significant ones remain here, and the Comparisons article is now linked for further reference. -Pmffl (talk) 18:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Notable engines as subsections (remove bullets)

I propose to place every bulleted paragraph under a separate subsection name for each engine (per MOS:PARA's provision). --AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 08:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Bullets provide better readability, so I'd prefer to keep them. And bullets are suitable for this section, since it's a list of items. Strongly disagree with making each engine a subsection; definitely no need for that. -Pmffl (talk) 15:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

"In the browser, they stay synchronized via the DOM"

No. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 20:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

It's partially correct, but the details are sophisticated, so I made an edit with a new reference. No specific mention of the DOM anymore in the JS paragraph. -Pmffl (talk) 03:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)