Firefox HTML Rendering

[Joel Bryan Juliano]

On 2/16/07, David Farning <dfarning at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 14:35 +0000, Pete Ryland wrote:
> > On 15/02/07, Joel Bryan Juliano <joelbryan.juliano at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have a HTML document created from Google Docs, and I noticed that
> > > font's are not displayed properly compared to Epiphany.
> >
> > If you don't have the Windows fonts package installed, which I assume
> > contains this font, each browser will guess at what font to display
> > (unless your style has fallback font options, which would be
> > preferred).  They seem to have made differing guesses, that's all.
> >
> > Pete
> >
>
> Hey guys
> I have forwarded this thread to ubuntu-mozillateam.  We are the folks
> who deal with all things mozilla related.
>
> thanks


Hi,

If only Firefox would be as high quality as Epiphany, then I'm not going to
use Epiphany.
The problem is everything is linked up and compiled with Firefox like an
adware in Ubuntu,
but all the devs know that it's possible to progress with this unpliant
approach right from the start.
There are xulrunner, which the debian mainstream have already been compiled
in and been using in their
GNOME desktop without the adware.

I think people should think more about typesetting, rendering, and quality
of the documents they worked on rather than the popularity of the
application they use, I believe FOSS exists not just to provide an
alternative, but a high quality alternative application that can do their
jobs without loosing the quality of their work.

Regards,
Joel Bryan

--
> David Farning <dfarning at gmail.com>
>
>


-- 
Carpe Diem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/sounder/attachments/20070216/c20541fd/attachment.htm