Re: Why Emacs should have a good web-browser

[joakim]

Jason Rumney <address@hidden> writes:

> Chong Yidong wrote:
>> That's excellent news.
>>
>> On a technical note, I think it makes more sense to associate embedded
>> applications with Emacs windows, rather than buffers as you're
>> apparently trying to do.  Otherwise, we run into the problem of handling
>> the situation where the same buffer is displayed in more than one
>> window.  Basically, we should have a way to say "the contents of this
>> window are handled by an embedded program, rather than by Emacs".  WDYT?
>>   
> It's not that difficult to handle, you just need to take snapshots of
> the application's display now and then.  The active window contains
> the real application, and any other windows can contain a snapshot of
> the display of that program.

This is basically what I'm aiming for with my xwidget patch. The active
window contains the live component, the other windows contain inactive
snapshots of the components(currently only grey rectangles in the
inactive windows).

Still, if the list finds the possibility of defering drawing of an
entire emacs window to an xembeddable component, I could try to
implement that on top of my current patch. I would need help on the
design of the interface, that is, where should the properties governing
this go, and what should their names and functions be. I think this
would be useful also, and it could go into the emacs tree way faster
than my current slow-moving xwidget patch.



-- 
Joakim Verona