Fwd: Create a Konqueror eBusiness Website 'Bug' Database?
zander at planescape.com
Sun Sep 22 08:03:07 BST 2002
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
- ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Create a Konqueror eBusiness Website 'Bug' Database?
Date: Sunday 22 September 2002 08:45
From: Tom <tomdeckert at uwalumni.com>
To: koffice at mail.kde.org
Please let me know if a different mail list is more apropriate
for this post.
I do all my general surfing with Konqueror, but
when I try to do eBusiness, I generally run into problems. I
think that the ability to conduct eBusiness would strongly
influence people's decision to choose or avoid Konqueror, so
I decided to write.
Would it make sense for Konqueror to add a formalized
"eBusiness-Site-Doesn't-Work" database beside the
current bug reporting database? Would this be an effective
way to focus ongoing Konqueror development? I would expect
bugs in either database could optionally refer to specific
bugs in the other. Basically, this database would contain
the information: "We know site 'foo' does not work with
Konqueror versions X.Y, because of 'bar'. Behaviour you
would see is 'blah'. This is/not easily fixable because of
'yada yada yada'."
Then buq squashing or new development could be aimed at
'site squashing'. How many people would love to say
"Squashed Pacific Gas and Electric today."? (Caveat: Just
an example; I have no idea how well their site works with
o) For users of older versions, it might make it
easier to learn "Oh, that site doesn't work with
versions of Konqueror prior to X.Y, but upgrading
should fix it.".
o) Might make it easier to distinguish the *intentionally*
Linux unfriendly sites from the *unintentionally*, allowing
Linux users to choose between boycotting and educating these
o) Web sites change! But, if a site is continually changing
in ways that break Konqueror, we might be able to take
it as a sign the site is *intentionally* Linux/Konqueror
o) The number of eBusiness sites is large. However, I think
it should be prioritizable - probably starting with any
large banks or utilities which don't already work.
Here in Australia, my list of problem sites starts with St.George Bank,
www.seek.com.au, and Telstra, but continues on from there.
To summarize, IMHO being able to conduct eBusiness is often a
primary reason for people to choose a browser. Therefore, it
is a very good way to improve acceptance of Konqueror. Hence,
it is important to know, in a formal manner, which sites do or
don't work with Konqueror.
Thanks for your attention.
Thomas Zander zander at planescape.com
We are what we pretend to be
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel