Design and Development of a New Web-Browser - Essay Example

?Design and Development of a New Web-browser Computing Research Projects ID: Supervisor Contents Contents 2 Introduction 4 1.1 Scope of Research 4 1.2 History 5 2. Literature Review 5 2.1 The role of a web browser 6 2.2 Structure of a Browser 6 User Interface 7 Browser Engine 8 Rendering Engine 8 Networking Subsystem 8 Java Script Interpreter & XML Parser 9 Display Backend 9 Data Persistance Subsystem 10 2.3 Use of Extensions and Add-ons 10 Threat embeded in Extensions 10 Ethical uses of Extensions 11 3. Research Methodology 11 3.1 Rationale for a qualitative research 12 3.2 Research Method 13 3.3 Interview 13 3.4 classification of Interviews 14 3.5 Data Analysis 14 Respondants’ diversity 15 Response on Semi-Structured Interview 16 5. Project Management 17 References 19 1. Introduction World Wide Web in our societies around the globe is now a common phenomenon and accessories that facilitate this phenomenon like a web browsers does not only carry an immense business scope but they have become the representatives of the technology itself. Web browsers are the vehicles that carry you along the fascinating world of the web while facilitating the use and eliminating the reliance on any additional software aids. Today’s web browsers are supposed to provide possibly all functionalities that a web site has to offer and a surfer may need to enjoy his web experience. More importantly, web browsers need to meet the requirements of fetching information from all around the globe while warranting a complex integrated security mechanism. 1.1 Scope of Research Design and development of a web browser in the backdrop of technological advancements of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and the ever increasing support requirements is a serious undertaking. It needs to support the cutting edge technologies, facilitate user while ensuring a pleasurable experience, playing and displaying nearly every possible format of information, securing browsing sessions, speeding up the task completions, adding ability to save sessions and user specific information, building abilities to recover from interruptions and breakups and the list goes on—it knows no limits. While discussing the scope of an explorer Godbole and Atul ( 2008) states, “It is the responsibility of the browser to display the document on the user’s screen when it receives it from the server. As a result, a browser consists of several large software components that work together that provide an abstracted view of seamless service.” Every day, there is a new change in technology, everyday there are new measures to be taken to ensure existence in the world of web browsing. The continued user support, maintenance and incorporation of updates are the tasks that demand serious and sustainable project management approach to suit the enormity of task in hand. 1.2 History The history of web browsers is nearly as old as that of the Internet itself. Majority of historians of computer sciences have accepted Tim Berners-Lee as the founder of the explorer technology. However, the Mosaic explorer by Andreessen team in the year 1993 gave WWW technologies a real boost. Later on it was Andreessen who formed Netscape Company that launched first commercial explorer, the Netscape Navigator. It was not before 1995, when the Microsoft jumped into the explorer business with its first version of Internet Explorer to capture its market share. Since then the dominance in the market has been a tough fight among Internet Explorer, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla, Firefox, Safari and lately Google Chrome. (Cheshire, 2008). The history of web browsers’ development is a fast changing history because it had to keep pace with the technological innovations in the field of computers, software, communications and the Internet. Today, browser development requires not only a bunch of technological expertise but it also demands a methodical project management approach. 2. Literature Review The purpose of this literature review is to investigate the emerging trends in explorer development. The review will take into account the perspectives of users as well as developers in the making of an explorer that can fulfill the requirements of all stakeholders. The review will also discuss the basic structure of explorer, various approaches that have been employed by popular explorers, the shortcomings of explorers that failed to gain user acceptance at large, technical details that need to be catered for the development of a successful explorer including but not limited to interface design guidelines and tentative user expectations from a new explorer. 2.1 The role of a web browser Since its advent by Tim Burner in 1990 web browsers have gone a long way into the developmental processes and have grown to the most complicated software applications that not only provide a platform for hundreds of web applications but it is also required to be compatible with a number of operating systems and many different hardware architectures. The shift of businesses to e-commerce has further burdened the browsers development with the high profile security structure which can guarantee the secure business transactions and information exchange. Most of the required functional support is provided to a user through browser plug-ins which can integrate itself with the browser to accommodate the additional support requirements. The role of these extensions in web browsers is increasing rapidly due to the worth and support of these extensions. “These utilities are almost always free to download, install and use, and they provide a wealth of additional functionality into the browser that will be useful you’re producing your websites.” (Dawson, 2009). 2.2 Structure of a Browser Browsers are considered to be the most important web application that has many roles to play in order to assist users, programmers, publishers, designers and other stakeholders. Accommodating requirements of all these segments and stakeholders while incorporating the necessary support is a gigantic task as far the development of a browser is concerned. Therefore, the structure of a web browser can be classified into multiple modules, segments or subsystems, each of these subsystems has specific role to play in the overall functioning of a browser while the total impact of these subsystems should convey the working of a whole system that responds to varying user requirements seamlessly. There are a number of browsers available in the market like Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera, Safari etc. Some of these browsers are proprietary and some others are open source. Although, the subsystems discussed above are not categorically defined by these browser vendors but an in-depth analysis of these browser can categorize some of the major subsystems or segments of these browser for an overall understanding and an intellectual debate on the working of a browser. Few among these subsystems of a browser are discussed in detail with reference to domain experts, developers and analysts. User Interface The forefront of a browser is the user interface that is used by the rest of the browser subsystems to interact and communicate with the user and developer. This communication is instigated through various tools of interaction like menus, commands, dialogue boxes etc. The basic role of interface layer is to serve as an interpreter between the browser engine and the user. The browser interface has distinct elements to communicate with a simple user and a web developer and the implementation of this interface design may be different in different browsers. However, the main objective of a web browser interface is to present the maximum information in a compact in concise manner, “The web browser interface has become, in the Internet Era, the standards for computer-mediated collaborations. The low-cost public infrastructure provided by the internet brought about seamless integration of data and resources to what was formerly a chaotic mix of dispersed LANs, most of them isolated from the other LANs. In the Internet Era, the problem is no longer accessing information located elsewhere, but to cope with information overload.” (Kock, 1999, p.14). Browser Engine The role of browser engine in the overall operability of a browser is of pivotal importance. It is supposed to load the pages and websites requested through entries in the address bar Unified Resource Locator (URL). Moreover it provides capability of navigation like forward, back, page load etc. The role and action of browser engine depends on its mapping over the rendering engine of the browser that is responsible for rendering an HTML code in a displayable format. (Grosskurth & Michael, 2006). Rendering Engine This component of a browser does the core work and prepares the of HTML tag in a displayable format. Some browsers have the HTML parser integrated with the rendering engine while some others have implemented it separately. However, for the purpose of an overall understanding of the browser functions we can consider HTML parser being a part of the rendering engine. In OP browser architecture Grier, Shuo and Samuel (2008) have designed an independent HTML parser that communicates with browser kernel to render web pages, “The HTML engine represents the root HTML docu­ment for the Web page instance. The HTML engine delegates all JavaScript interpretation to the JavaScript component, which communicates back with the HTML engine to access any document object model (DOM) elements.” Networking Subsystem The world over popularity of Internet being a rapid an reliable communication mechanism rest heavily over the browsers capability to communicate and transfer data efficiently and effectively. Every browser has a networking subsystem that looks after the file transfers using specific File Transfer Protocols (FTPs), ensures communications among dispersed LANs and WANs. The network is the backbone of the whole mechanisms on which the browsers operates to communicate and transfer of data. (Lironcourt, 2010). Java Script Interpreter & XML Parser Java script interpretation is indispensible for all browsers to ensure support for platform independent web applications. As XML code gives the web developers a great flexibility and ease of use therefore built-in XML parser is mandatory of any browser in today’s web driven communication syndrome. A lot of web application and web sites have java script and XML code embedded into their pages. Java Script Interpreter and XML parser’s job is to display and render these objects correctly. Display Backend As we have discussed earlier the complexity that we encounter in the design and architecture of a browser is marked by its versatility and diverse functional support. Display backend is the component that negotiates display and windowing details with the underlying operating system and because a browser is supposed to be operable with almost all operating systems therefore, the complexity of display backend is evident. Grosskurth and Michael () have explained the functionality of the display backed in these words, “The Display Backend subsystem provides drawing and windowing primitives, a set of user interface widgets, and a set of fonts. It may be tied closely with the operating system.” Data Persistance Subsystem One of the major factors that dictate the acceptability of a web browser is the support and ease of use that it offers to the end users. Bookmarks, Tabbed Browsing, session restore provisions etc. are few examples of successful implementation of data persistence subsystems in some of the contemporary web browsers. This subsystem simply collects and store browsing information on disk that may be useful for a pertinent user later on or may speed up the user browsing experience by restoring a previous browsing session due to accidental or planned closure of the browser. 2.3 Use of Extensions and Add-ons The web browser requirements are driven by the ever changing requirement of web publishing. A Browser can only ensure its existence by keeping pace with these changes and accommodating them into its support list by either a direct update or through induction of some an extension. The research is required to look for the support of current browsers and the extensions they have to offer in order to engage and maintain the interest of users and developers. Threat embeded in Extensions However, the use of extensions poses several security hazards and the preferable solution is the official patches and updated to the browser. Extensions are extensively used and exploited by the hackers and they provide an easy way to ride over the actual engine of the browser seamlessly, “Overall, we think browser extensions offer the best combination of functionality and ease of use when it comes to HTTP analysis, but depending on the situation, command line tools may offer more easily scriptable functionality for the job. As with the most hacking, it’s common to leverage the best features of several tools to get the overall job done, so we’ve tried to be comprehensive in our coverage, while at the same time clearly indicating which tools are our favorites based on extensive testing real-world scenarios.” (Scambray, Mike & Caleb, 2006). Ethical uses of Extensions The extension are widely used by various browser vendors to collect important information that can be used to support the internet surfing, web applications and many other ethical and legitimate use of information hence collected. “In Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome and other compatible browsers, Greasemonkey can be used for augmenting browsing with visualizations. Greasemonkey is a browser extension that allows implementing scripts that tailor web documents on-the-fly as the documents are loaded into the browser. A URI space is defined for the given script to handle.” (Salonen & Huhtamaki, 2010, p. 152). Similarly, extensions can be used to implement APIs that can be used to access and retrieve some user specific data, “APIs for accessing user geographic location via browsers’ APIs are also being actively developed. Google Gears, a browser extension for Firefox, Internet Explorer and Safari implement a Geolocation API that can be used to obtain positional data.” (Salonen & Huhtamaki). 3. Research Methodology The research methodology adopted for the design and development phases is semi structured interviews with the IT professionals and experts, developers and general users. The method was adopted to gather the qualitative data on various requirement, design and architecture features and collection of user requirements based on usability experience of existing web browsers. The research will also assess the ethical aspects and professional reflections that can be incorporated in design and development phase of the web browser. 3.1 Rationale for a qualitative research The basic rationale behind the selection of a qualitative research methodology is the specific nature of the browser design and development requirements. The corner stone in the making of a browser is its wide range acceptability. This acceptability is triggered based on characteristics, functionalities and support of value added features with a higher degree of public demand and elevated rating among experts. A qualitative research can produce results that can be used to analyze the user requirements and experts’ expectations. This analysis can be further exploited to design and develop a product with better and enhanced acceptability and popularity. Secondly, the qualitative research strategy is ideal for day to day changing situations, data, and trends. This flexibility aptly fulfills the requirements in quickly changing trends for a browser acceptability and market share. “A key attribute of a qualitative research is flexibility. Such research can be more sensitive than quantitative research to the day-to-day changes that occur in social organizations like schools.” (Grady, 1998, p. 4). Lastly, the data collection techniques that suit our requirements are offered by qualitative research methodology. We are looking for the answers of qualitative nature like why a browser is liked by someone, why some feature in the upcoming browser can help you better, why a browser is supporting an extension with security loophole etc. These are questions best answered by qualitative research because number in a quantitative research just can’t help it. Three basic mode of data collections as stated by Grady (1998) ideally suit our requirements, “One way of defining qualitative research is by its primary data collection strategies. The three main data collection strategies for qualitative research are interviews, observations and document analysis.” (p. 3). 3.2 Research Method We will use semi structured interviews or structured conversation as our primary data collection strategy. This strategy is not strictly formal in nature and does not require a specific number of participants for its validation. It is important to understand that the qualitative research does not measure anything rather it is employed to get some insight into question which may in turn give birth to some other questions and step by step we can fill the gaps and complete the puzzle. Each new answer increases our comprehension of the subject and we can reach a conclusion to finally makeup our mind on questions raised in research. Case study and focus group approaches are not employed in the research because of cost and time considerations and the expertise of the participants in the knowledge domain. Observations and document analysis are applicable in our scenario but not without a cost of time, effort and money therefore, these strategies are not considered suitable for this qualitative research. Finally, our research will fully relay on semi structured interviews or structured conversation. 3.3 Interview Interview is an effective, pleasurable and widely used strategy used in collection of qualitative data for research purposes. Despite being very exciting interviews often require quite intricate handling and extracting information from the interviewee is not always a simple task. The quality of data collected through interview method depends heavily on the skills and expertise of the interviewer. Interview is flexible method of data collection in the sense that interviewee can be explained of any ambiguities, the length of interview can be changed based on the flow and quality of information, many non-verbal expressions can extend the meaning and understanding etc. 3.4 classification of Interviews Interviews conducted for qualitative research are classified into structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews. Structured interviews are more like a verbal questionnaire conducted face-to-face. This type of interview does not offer any deviation from a preset pattern and results in rather straight forward responses with no or little insight into the allied questions which may rise during an interview. Semi-structured interview are the most common format used by qualitative researchers because of its flexible nature. These interviews have a structure which can be modify on the-fly. Interviewee can deviate from the main structure of the interview to explain some concept or give an insight into a matter. Similarly, the interviewer can ask some allied questions if he deem it relevant and helpful. Unstructured interview are more like a conversation and therefore these can be too good or too bad and the output heavily depend on the skills of the interviewer. Avoiding personal and professional biases in such interviews is quite challenging and leading questions and comments can be used positively or negatively based on the experience of the interviewer. This method is mostly used by professional and experienced researchers. (Grady, 1998, p. 5-25). 3.5 Data Analysis A total of ten interviews were conducted, out which five respondents were professional programmers and five advance users of the web browsers were interviewed based on a semi-structured interview format. The purpose of the interviews was to collect data on the browsing experience at available web browsers and to find out issues that were encountered by these users and programmer while surfing and web development. Data on favorite features of various browsers was also collected to ascertain a comparative study of various features offered by these browsers. Questions were mostly modeled for the Microsoft Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome, Safari and Opera. Respondants’ diversity Out of five programmers being interviewed three were selected with a background experience of browser development and two with strong web development background. The interviews were accordingly tailored to collect maximum relevant data which can be used in the design and development of a new browser. Leading questions were asked to ascertain the programmers’ expectations from a new browser and the features they would love to have incorporated in this browser. Similarly, interviews with experienced browser developers were aimed to extract maximum useful insight and intelligence that may extend some helpful in the design and development of a new browser. Similarly, to ensure a better data collection and expanded representation two out five advance users were IT professional, two post graduate students and a naive web surfer were interviewed. The induction of a naive interviewee was decided to gain some insight into the requirements of immature web surfers and to determine some useful feature that might be helpful for this class of users. It is because the popularity of a web browser across all segments of users can result in a wide range of acceptability and better and enhance market share. Following table enlist various respondents and their qualification for the interview; Respondent Level of Expertise Professional Experience (Years) Highest Role in a Team Programmer-1 Browser Development 10 Project Manager Programmer-2 Browser Development 8 Team Lead Programmer-3 Browser Development 5 Member Programmer-4 Web Development 7 Team Lead Programmer-5 Web Development 3 Member Professional-1 Marketing 15 Manager Professional-2 Blogger 3 Freelance Student-1 Post Graduate Level Not Applicable Not Applicable Student-2 Post Graduate Level Not Applicable Not Applicable Naive User Immature Not Applicable Not Applicable Response on Semi-Structured Interview A mixed response was gathered from the respondents on the comparative nature of available browser. Programmer-1 described Microsoft Internet Explorer being a compulsion for design decisions because of its overwhelming market share. However, he praised the Mozilla Firefox for its recent increased market share and value added features. Programmer-2 was almost of the same view with a little more favorable remark for Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome. Programmer-3 clearly gave Mozilla Firefox an elevated evaluation and argued for its extended assistance for programmers. He found it relatively easier to use and manage information with better and enhanced interface and a wide range of extensions and add-ons. Programmer-4 and Programmer-5 were also found relatively more comfortable with Mozilla Firefox. However, they did appreciate Microsoft Internet Explorer (MSIE) for its better structure and support. Moreover, they found a better online support and material for MSIE. Both of the professional respondents were agreed on better usability and maintainability features of MSIE. The interviewer found them in complete favor of MSIE as for them it completely out-weigh rest of the browsers. However, they negate experience over any other browser, which bars their favor to some extent. Student-1 found Google Chrome more likeable because of its extended features of fast and reliable search and mail provisions. He also argued its stability over other browsers. Student-2 claimed Mozilla Firefox to be more secure and efficient while the naive user found it easy to work at MSIE. He found it more helpful and comprehensible. All programmers were more confident over the security features of the MSIE and placed Mozilla Firefox on second priority. Programmers express their reservation on extended induction of extension and add-ons in Mozilla Firefox and declared it a security risk especially, in case of e-commerce online transactions. 5. Project Management The design and development project of a browser is a huge responsibility and requires a serious, well structured and sound project management approach. Project management has more to do with art then to with experience. It requires extra-ordinary coordination skills that can be used to achieve more coordination among various functional and managerial units of an organization. Because more often than not IT project life cycles are iterative in nature therefore, the project is management plan for the design and development of web browser is designed on four major project management components; 1. Track 2. Control 3. Report 4. Review The project manager will be responsible to track the overall progress of the project and will supervise the Team Leads (TLs) of various modules to ensure a well structured overall project management. TLs will be responsible to control their teams in professional manner. They will be responsible for in time completion of various deliverables as and when required by the project manager. TLs will prepare reports on the modules overall progress on weekly bases for the perusal of project manager, who will prepare a consolidated reported for the consideration of higher management. Based on this consolidated report higher management will review the performance of the project manager and TLs and will of the asses the overall progress of the project. Project Manager will be responsible for the in time and satisfactory completion of the project. References Cheshire, J. (2008). Special edition Using Microsoft Expression web 2. United States of America: QUE Publishing. Dawson, A. (2009). Getting started building websites. New York, NY: Springer Vertag. Godbole, S. A. & Atul, K. (2008). Web technologies: TCP/IP architecture, and Java programming (2nd ed.). India, Delhi: The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. Grady, M. P. (1998). Qualitative and action research: A practitioner handbook. Indiana, USA: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Grier, C., Shuo, T., and Samuel T. K. (2008). Building a more secure Web browser. Retrieved from. http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/2008-08/pdfs/grier.pdf Grosskurth, A., Michael, W. G. (2006). Architecture and evolution of the modern web browser. Retrieved from. http://www.grosskurth.ca/papers/browser-archevol-20060619.pdf Gube, J. (2009). History of web browsers. Retrieved from http://sixrevisions.com/web-development/the-history-of-web-browsers/ Kock, N. F. (1999). Process improvement and organizational learning: The role of collaboration technologies. United States of America: Idea Group Publishing. Lironcourt, J. (2010). Analyzing Information Flow in JavaScript-based Browser Extensions. Internet Security Seminar. Retrieved from. http://www.net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de/teaching/ws0910/IS_seminar/pdf/201001152_Paper_JLironcourt.pdf Salonen, J., Huhtamaki, J. (2010). Digital ecosystems, Third International Conference 2010, Revised selected papers. New York, NY: Springer Scambray, J., Mike, S., Caleb, S. (2006). Hacking exposed web applications (2nd ed.). India, Delhi: TATA McGraw-Hill. Read More