Qt MathML Widget

[John Tapsell]

2009/3/20 Aleix Pol <aleixpol at kde.org>:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM, John Tapsell <johnflux at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 2009/3/20 Aleix Pol <aleixpol at kde.org>:
>> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Allen Winter <winter at kde.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Howdy,
>> >>
>> >> I assume we are all following the "Qt MathML Widget" discussion on
>> >> k-c-d.
>> >> Ideas on that issue?
>> >>
>> >> My first thought was sourceforge with some folks to maintain it there.
>> >>
>> >> kdesupport is basically the same as sourceforge, but somewhat easier
>> >> to deal with.
>> >>
>> >> Would kdelibs be ok? doesn't feel "right" to go there, but I won't
>> >> object
>> >> if someone claims maintainership there.
>> >>
>> >> ??
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Allen Winter | Software Engineer | 1-888-872-9339
>> >> KDAB, Inc. | "Platform-independent software solutions"
>> >> http://kdab.com | 1-866-777-5322 (US) | +46-563-540090 (Sweden)
>> >
>> > Referring to what thiago macieira said on the k-c-d list, I think that
>> > he
>> > has his point.
>> > We should only put it in kdelibs if we're forking it (what are your
>> > plans
>> > john?) and renaming it.
>>
>> I think we almost certainly want to do this, and encourage people to
>> expand on it.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Otherwise I'd be fine if it is in a separate library in kdesupport, but
>> > since they don't ensure ABI stability i'm not sure whether that would be
>> > a
>> > good idea.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Aleix
>> >
>> > PS: I'm not on this list, CC me if tehre is any other message on this
>> > subject please.
>> >
>
> Wouldn't it be a better idea to keep the work on KFormula? we don't want 2
> KDE codes doing the same thing!

It might be worth dropping the KDE4 KFormula.
I would suggest either:

*) Go with QtMMlWidget.  It works.  It's read only, but it's still
useful and if we can pry open the API a bit we could get it working in
KOffice.  Adding editing can be then done on top, building on an
already supported base.

*) Redo the port of KDE 3's KFormula, removing the fairly minimal
KOffice specific code.

I estimate the second option to be a solid two week's work for an
experienced KDE developer.

I think the first option is the more stable option and is ready now,
even if it's not up to the feature level of KDE 3's KFormula.

John