4 ms·

Slight nitpick: I wish they would use the term "other browser suppliers" instead of "other browser vendors", as Firefox, Chrome, Opera, etc. are not sold for mo

Slight nitpick: I wish they would use the term "other browser suppliers" instead of "other browser vendors", as Firefox, Chrome, Opera, etc. are not sold for money, they are supplied for free. But this is good news. Die SHA-1, die!

ketralnis 11y ago
Honest question. This is the sentence you're referring to: > We will continue to coordinate with other browser vendors to evaluate the impact of this timeline based on telemetry and current projections for feasibility of SHA-1 collisions How does "supplier" vs "vendor" impede your understanding there?
- sarciszewski 11y ago
  Because not all of the development teams, often run by volunteers, are vendors.
larrys 11y ago
Free to me doesn't matter. By one definition a vendor is a company that supplies goods. Some definitions go further to say that they "sell" the goods. However there is nothing to indicate in any definition of vendor that money has to change hands. A company could be a vendor for a particular product and give it away for free. Additionally whether an organization is non profit or for profit really doesn't change the situation. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/vendor.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/vendor.asp http://www.yourdictionary.com/supplier http://www.yourdictionary.com/supplier
- sarciszewski 11y ago
  Counter-point: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Vendor https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Vendor
  - larrys 11y ago
    Counter-point to your counter-point! https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Prefix https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre...
  - Chlorus 11y ago
    Here are some other entries on that page so you can tell how seriously you should take that list: "LAMP system” "Content" "Compensation" "Creator"
    - johncolanduoni 11y ago
      Wow, what a page! My personal favorite is "Creative commons licensed", which you apparently shouldn't use because it's universally more important to distinguish the license based on the FSF's definition of free. Also replacing various biased, propaganda terms (fair point) with "corrected" biased, propaganda terms (less fair) is an interesting choice. edit: typo
tptacek 11y ago
I'm confused; IE isn't sold for money either.
- debacle 11y ago
  Found the M$ $hi££. \s
- sarciszewski 11y ago
  Now I'm confused, because I didn't ever imply that it was.
jballanc 11y ago
In CSS they're referred to as "Vendor Prefixes": https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/vendor-prefixes https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/vendor-prefixes Regardless of usage in normal English, in the context of web browsers "Vendor" seem to be the correct terminology.
paulgerhardt 11y ago
One of the bigger sources for browser revenue is to be the default search provider in the address bar, or failing that, being one of the handful of default options. These companies/organizations all engage in financial or service transactions with each other even if they give their product away to end users for 'free'.

ketralnis 11y ago

Honest question. This is the sentence you're referring to: > We will continue to coordinate with other browser vendors to evaluate the impact of this timeline based on telemetry and current projections for feasibility of SHA-1 collisions How does "supplier" vs "vendor" impede your understanding there?

sarciszewski 11y ago
Because not all of the development teams, often run by volunteers, are vendors.

larrys 11y ago

Free to me doesn't matter. By one definition a vendor is a company that supplies goods. Some definitions go further to say that they "sell" the goods. However there is nothing to indicate in any definition of vendor that money has to change hands. A company could be a vendor for a particular product and give it away for free. Additionally whether an organization is non profit or for profit really doesn't change the situation. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/vendor.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/vendor.asp http://www.yourdictionary.com/supplier http://www.yourdictionary.com/supplier

sarciszewski 11y ago
Counter-point: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Vendor https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Vendor
- larrys 11y ago
  Counter-point to your counter-point! https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Prefix https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Vendor_Pre...
- Chlorus 11y ago
  Here are some other entries on that page so you can tell how seriously you should take that list: "LAMP system” "Content" "Compensation" "Creator"
  - johncolanduoni 11y ago
    Wow, what a page! My personal favorite is "Creative commons licensed", which you apparently shouldn't use because it's universally more important to distinguish the license based on the FSF's definition of free. Also replacing various biased, propaganda terms (fair point) with "corrected" biased, propaganda terms (less fair) is an interesting choice. edit: typo

tptacek 11y ago

I'm confused; IE isn't sold for money either.

debacle 11y ago
Found the M$ $hi££. \s
sarciszewski 11y ago
Now I'm confused, because I didn't ever imply that it was.

jballanc 11y ago

In CSS they're referred to as "Vendor Prefixes": https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/vendor-prefixes https://wiki.csswg.org/spec/vendor-prefixes Regardless of usage in normal English, in the context of web browsers "Vendor" seem to be the correct terminology.

paulgerhardt 11y ago

One of the bigger sources for browser revenue is to be the default search provider in the address bar, or failing that, being one of the handful of default options. These companies/organizations all engage in financial or service transactions with each other even if they give their product away to end users for 'free'.