[Oberon] Oberon Text and new systems; was Re (n): Question about Oakwood guidelines and design choices

[Joerg]

dillo and netsurf are called "tiny" or "small" browsers.
But "tiny" and "small" are relative. The code size of Dillo 2.2 is (uncompressed) 1.7 MB.
And needs at least 30 MB of RAM for every open tab.

This might be tiny compared to other browsers that need 128 MB or even 256 MB minimum, but is far out of reach of the FPGA boards I have.
The original FPGA Oberon board supports 1 MB. (The dillo executable alone without one open HTML page wouldn't fit in this RAM)
The Oberon system on the FPGA board I have uses 16 MB. Dillo could fit (assuming we ported its code base to Oberon) but could not render a HTML page

br
Jörg



Am 09.06.21, 22:44 schrieb "Oberon im Auftrag von Michael Schierl" <oberon-bounces at lists.inf.ethz.ch im Auftrag von schierlm at gmx.de>:

    Hello Liam,


    Am 09.06.2021 um 18:17 schrieb Liam Proven:
    > well as others. It supports HTML 4, CSS 2


    If a browser supports HTML4 and/or CSS2, I would not call it HTML5.

    > HTML5 is not the big problem, IMHO. Javascript is the big problem.

    While JS is also a big problem, there are *many* HTML5 features that can
    be used without scripting and while some of them may be simple to
    implement, implementing *all* of them will massively bloat the browser.

    I'm talking about embedded media/video, inline SVG, CSS3 (for both HTML
    and SVG), shadow DOM (sometimes also called element namespaces), CSS
    animations, CSS variables, CSS transforms, new input element types
    (color, slider, multifile upload, camera upload), CSS media/darktheme
    detection, CSS blending modes.

    All of them can be used without relying on scripting, and modern
    websites often do. And probably I forgot a dozen or more others.


    Regards,


    Michael
    --
    Oberon at lists.inf.ethz.ch mailing list for ETH Oberon and related systems
    https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/oberon