Bug 90548

Created attachment 150784 [details] Patch

Comment on attachment 150784 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=150784&action=review > Source/WebKit2/ChangeLog:10 > + > + Add methods to Ewk_View and retrieve and set the > + zoom levels for both the page and the text. > + zoom level is really legacy, and for accessibility I guess some min font sizes should be used instead. Are you sure you want to add this?

(In reply to comment #2) > (From update of attachment 150784 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=150784&action=review > > > Source/WebKit2/ChangeLog:10 > > + > > + Add methods to Ewk_View and retrieve and set the > > + zoom levels for both the page and the text. > > + > > zoom level is really legacy, and for accessibility I guess some min font sizes should be used instead. Are you sure you want to add this? I did not know those were legacy. We had those methods in WK1 and use them at least in EWKLauncher so I added them back so not to loose functionality. The WK2 GTK port has those methods as well. I checked the Qt port and only the "page" zoom is marked as legacy, not the "text" one. I know EWSLauncher uses the zoom feature and I was planning to do the same for EFL MiniBrowser after this patch landed.

The reason that I am mentioning this is that there is an ongoing consolidation of mobile and desktop browser behavior and lots of pieces to fall into their right spots. This relates to viewport interaction, layout sizes etc. And in this light the zoom is like a legacy accesibility feature which doesn't really belong on mobile devices and it is hard to find where it really fits. I actually believe it is a very seldom used feature today, because it can totally break layout and it does more so today that earlier due to pages using more detailed layout and due to web apps expecting specific sizes. For Qt we are trying to not open a can of worms and only add support like this when we know there is a proper understood use-case and when we know how it all fits together.

gyuyoung, ryuan, do you have use for those APIs? Dominik, any opinion? If we consider other targets than mobile (in particular TV and IVI), does it make more sense? I don't mind dropping the patch if we don't have any use for it on any target. I would just like to make sure everyone thinks this way.

Though I'm not sure now, in my opinion, EFL port may be used by TV, tablet and other electronics in future. I was told there is a project to port WebKit EFL to other devices now. In addition, as you may know, Tizen is using WebKit EFL as web engine. - https://www.tizen.org/about Tizen goal is to be ported to many devices. So, in my humble opinion, it is good to add this APIs for EFL port.

(In reply to comment #6) > Though I'm not sure now, in my opinion, EFL port may be used by TV, tablet and other electronics in future. I was told there is a project to port WebKit EFL to other devices now. This it should be solved differently depending on target DPI as well as distance to the screen. CSS is specified as 96dpi, but mobile content is laid out as the screen is using 160dpi (if different it is scaled up/down with the device pixel ratio), as that fits with 96dpi given the most common viewing distance. Something similar should be done for TV's. That is the right way to solve it.

Marking as WONTFIX for later reference. I'll implement device pixel ratio is a separate bug.

(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Though I'm not sure now, in my opinion, EFL port may be used by TV, tablet and other electronics in future. I was told there is a project to port WebKit EFL to other devices now. > > This it should be solved differently depending on target DPI as well as distance to the screen. CSS is specified as 96dpi, but mobile content is laid out as the screen is using 160dpi (if different it is scaled up/down with the device pixel ratio), as that fits with 96dpi given the most common viewing distance. > > Something similar should be done for TV's. That is the right way to solve it. I see what is your point on #webkit-efl irc. Ok, I agree with your advice. Thanks.