I haven't yet spent much time, effort or research into WebKit, but there are ruby-gtk bindings to it. I am
using ruby-gtk3 in particular since some time, and CSS (at the least the subset of CSS that GTK supports).
It's quite nifty. I still like gtk2 (oldschool never dies), but CSS is great (excluding some of the more recent
complexities ... variables? What are they thinking ...). Being able to use one "unified" UI language would
be really great in the long run. See also toolkits such as libui - yes, not usable for everything but it's so
convenient from the idea ... I remember after having learned GTK (via ruby-gtk), it was so refreshingly
simple to use libui.
A problem I see is as to who is maintaining/controlling the software stack. With WebKit it's Apple mostly
I think? With GTK it is IBM/Red Hat, and a few smaller actors aggregated via GNOME. I am not necessarily
full anti-private interests per se, but there have been many examples of where the interest of the people
is at odds with the interest of whoever maintains a stack. In fact: I dropped off from firefox after
constantly disagreeing with the Mozilla folks about what they have been doing in the last ~10 years or
so. Then one developer stating that pulseaudio/systemd is mandatory for audio was enough ... I can
not watch youtube videos in firefox but I can just fine in palemoon, so mozilla was not acting in "good
faith" here, IMO. But I digress.
My bigger dream would be to really have one strong, popular language or toolkit where UI elements
can be defined and re-used just fine. I have been trying to do that via ruby DSLs too, like common
things such as:
button.on_clicked { do_something }
Of course you can do this just fine in javascript, gtk, qt and so forth, but I want something that is
more "generic" and streamlined. And then easily "implementable" everywhere, without users having
to think - at the least for most parts. (Toolkits are different, so they don't offer the same or use
the same idioms either.)
As for Mozilla destroying more than creating - they have done so indeed in the last ~10 years but the
question is why people still want to lend credibility to someone who is just a Google shell these
days. All the influx of money doesn't go into making any real improvement anymore. It's a sunk
ship IMO. There is a reason why so many people have abandoned firefox, and while most of this
is due to chrome and Google flexing their muscles, I am pretty certain that this is not the only
reason.
> There is no documentation for this as Mozilla never wrote anything post gecko/2 in this regard
Yeah. That is usually a sign of bad engineering when those writing the code don't want to write
documentation. It's kind of ironic how Rust would become more appreciated than Firefox ...
evidently Mozilla focuses on other things than firefox!