Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Looks like it may be loading different JavaScript for the map interface (notice
the zoom buttons that appear in CEF but not test_shell). Maybe it's looking
for a feature that isn't enabled in CEF?
Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com
on 22 Oct 2010 at 12:36
It works at older version. What is the difference??
I think it is maybe r78..not sure around that version.
it is working good.
Original comment by ksdjjang...@gmail.com
on 12 Nov 2010 at 3:37
Issue 197 has been merged into this issue.
Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com
on 2 Mar 2011 at 2:17
Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com
on 2 Mar 2011 at 2:18
This problem is present in the Java and .NET version, but not in WebKit for SWT
(http://www.genuitec.com/about/labs-webkit-for-swt/WebKit%20For%20SWT%20Develope
r%20Guide.html).
Original comment by fredrik....@gmail.com
on 31 Mar 2011 at 6:02
This was introduced between r78 and r85 - my guess would be r82 when the
underlaying libraries changed; I've tried to look through the diffs to find a
reason with no luck, but since I don't know the code I get lost in the sheer
size of changes in r82.
Original comment by fredrik....@gmail.com
on 2 Apr 2011 at 10:35
Not sure if this should be broken out into a separate bug, but an additional
feature of the change from r78 to r85 is that markers don't work, either.
http://code.google.com/intl/en/apis/maps/documentation/javascript/examples/marke
r-simple.html
In r78 a marker is plotted and dragging works. In r85, neither works. I think
both may be due to the same root cause, though.
Original comment by jpie...@blacktron.com
on 5 May 2011 at 3:35
Also entered this issue on the gmaps-api-issues project to try to help figure
out/eliminate the discrepancy between the API's browser detection and
maps.google.com's browser detection:
http://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=3290
Original comment by jpie...@blacktron.com
on 5 May 2011 at 4:50
There's a google response on the issue I posted right above this message.
They're asking questions so now would be a good time for someone who actually
knows a lot more about chromium embedded internals than I do (just about
anyone, really!) to participate.
Original comment by jpie...@blacktron.com
on 7 May 2011 at 9:20
As explained in the linked Maps API issue:
http://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=3290
The root cause of this is that the CEF is by default compiled with
WebKit::WebRuntimeFeatures::enableTouch(true);
which makes the CEF register events it will not handle , which that make the
Google servers recognize this device as a device with touch support.
If you want CEF to behave like a browser in all means, you have to recompile
CEF with line:
WebKit::WebRuntimeFeatures::enableTouch(true);
changed to:
WebKit::WebRuntimeFeatures::enableTouch(false);
in browser_webkit_init.h :
http://www.google.com/codesearch#SgTHaFLUelA/trunk/libcef/browser_webkit_init.h&
q=touch%20package:http://chromiumembedded%5C.googlecode%5C.com&l=60
@magreenblatt I think it would be good to change in the codebase, and then
include a HowTo on compiling CEF with touch support, do you agree ?
Original comment by kaska...@google.com
on 5 Jul 2011 at 11:04
Fixed in revision 265. Chromium hides touch support behind a TOUCH_UI define
that is only set when building with GYP_DEFINES="touchui=1". It's not entirely
clear, but I think this is currently only used on mobile linux-based platforms.
Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com
on 7 Jul 2011 at 1:55
When can we expect to get the fix in the downloads ?
Latest revision 259 is uploaded 14 Juni.
Original comment by roland.b...@gmail.com
on 18 Jul 2011 at 8:23
Could you please generate another binary release for this fixed revision?
Compiling this project is really giving me headaches, as it is a very big and
complex one.
Thanks in advance.
Original comment by ivan.re...@gmail.com
on 4 Aug 2011 at 9:45
Yes, agree on that. Is there other issues stopping to build a binary release ?
Original comment by roland.b...@gmail.com
on 5 Aug 2011 at 5:46
Binary release 275 contains the fix for this issue.
Original comment by magreenb...@gmail.com
on 9 Aug 2011 at 2:02
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
ksdjjang...@gmail.com
on 21 Oct 2010 at 1:09