16 ms·

HTML5 by Default – Draft Proposal

66 points by synthmeat 10y ago

TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
I like that Google are moving to this model. It's already how some people (like me) have their browsers configured anyway. Flash is a pain, performance and battery life-wise, and it's all too often used for video ads and such. Making Flash on the web click-to-play for everyone means we're a step closer to confining Flash to the garbage can of history.
- robmcm 10y ago
  "Flash is a pain, performance and battery life-wise, and it's all too often used for video ads and such" Unfortunately you could easily replace Flash for JavaScript these days. I wonder how long before the default is to brows with JavaScript turned off... or is it too integral to basic web pages now? I think we will look back at the days when Flash was prevalent wish we could easily group all the advertising and cpu intensive scripts into a optional plugin.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
    At least JS can be constrained somewhat by browser extensions.
  - andybak 10y ago
    > I wonder how long before the default is to brows with JavaScript turned off... or is it too integral to basic web pages now? As Flash once was. Maybe a grass-roots revolt is needed. Something akin to Apple refusing to allow Flash on iOS. Imagine if js was throttled - or automatically disabled if a page was detected as being too resource-intensive? That would realign the incentives of user and content-producer and web-developers would find it considerably easier to argue for spending time on performance tuning. I believe Google's using pagespeed as a factor in ranking is a small step in this direction. I hope someone goes all in.
    - franciscop 10y ago
      I believe there's some limit for javascript in inactive tabs: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15871942/how-do-browsers-pause-change-javascript-when-tab-or-window-is-not-active http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15871942/how-do-browsers-...
    - ygra 10y ago
      > Imagine if js was throttled - or automatically disabled if a page was detected as being too resource-intensive? Google tried doing something in that direction, by not running functions registered with setTimeout in certain cases (a pattern that's supposedly often used by ads on a site, impacting load time), thereby breaking a whole lot of legitimate cases along the way.
      - robmcm 10y ago
        Opera has just done something like this for it's low power mode: Reduced activity in background tabs Waking CPU less often due to more optimal scheduling of JavaScript timers Automatically pausing unused plug-ins Reduced frame rate to 30 frames per second Tuning video-playback parameters and forcing usage of hardware accelerated video codecs Paused animations of browser themes http://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/05/introducing-power-saving-mode/ http://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/05/introducing-power...
  - nye2k 10y ago
    You absolutely cannot easily reproduce a proper Flash experience in JavaScript, or Canvas. This is a problem we've been working on for years building animated experiences for kids, and the js "equivalent" is heavy on assets and extremely limits what the artist and developer can produce in the same amount of time.
    - robmcm 10y ago
      Sorry that should have read: "Unfortunately you could easily replace Flash for JavaScript these days [in that quote]."
    - Aldo_MX 10y ago
      > You absolutely cannot easily reproduce a proper Flash experience in JavaScript, or Canvas. Didn't Adobe Animate[1] (the successor of Flash) allow you to convert a .fla file to Canvas (or WebGL)? [1] https://helpx.adobe.com/animate/using/creating-publishing-html5-canvas-document.html#converting-to-html5 https://helpx.adobe.com/animate/using/creating-publishing-ht...
  - intrasight 10y ago
    My default is to browse with JS turned off.
TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
The title "HTML5 by Default – Draft Proposal" isn't very descriptive, unfortunately, even though it's the original title. Something along the lines of "Moving from Flash to HTML5 by default in Google Chrome" might be more helpful. I'm not sure.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- brudgers 10y ago
  To me, it's not descriptive in the sense that the plan calls for whitelisting Flash on n sites by default. Which means that HTML5 isn't really the default.
  - rictic 10y ago
    (For one year, then the top sites whitelist will be removed)
verandaguy 10y ago
I'm all for this proposal. It's relatively unintrusive while keeping control mostly in the hands of the user. Not sure where the official RFC/comment thread for this is, but pending finding that, it would be nice to half a mechanism similar to AdBlock's where a user can whitelist flash based on domain, subdomain, or directory[0]. I'm also against the idea of "trusting" the top ten most used domains. It justifies further telemetry by Google (I know, it's Chrome anyway), but more importantly, it puts those "trusted" sites in a position where they can take advantage of their positions to inject malicious or unwanted content into their Flash elements. [0] https://i.imgur.com/fFuAwDV.png https://i.imgur.com/fFuAwDV.png
amelius 10y ago
> When a user encounters a site that needs Flash Player, a prompt will appear at the top of the page, giving the user the option of allowing it for a site How about keeping the experience exactly the same for both cases (allow downloading of the HTML5 video source in non-flash format, by using an internal transcoder).
- Fargren 10y ago
  Flash is used for more than video (and ads). Flash games still exist, for example.
  - sevensor 10y ago
    And homestarrunner.com! The Internet of 10-15 years ago was awash in legitimate Flash content, and we're rapidly losing the ability to view it.
    - pfooti 10y ago
      Luckily, almost all of the H*R stuff has gotten ported to youtube content. It's a little sad to not find the random easter eggs anymore, but the stuff is still there for your eeeemail pleasure. (preeeow paper noise) https://www.youtube.com/user/homestarrunnerdotcom https://www.youtube.com/user/homestarrunnerdotcom
  - yoz-y 10y ago
    Flash games still exist but I doubt there are lot of new ones created. It seems that there are not that many HTML5 games created either. My theory is that it is because most of casual gaming now happens on mobile where flash is unavailable and HTML5 is subpar.
    - Fargren 10y ago
      Absolutely, very little Flash content is being created. But I still think it's not good that we are losing access to waht's already there. It could be this generation's version of link rot (which is still a problem too).
cptskippy 10y ago
Flash is used a great deal for advertisements which most people aren't going to care is missing from a page but it will still trigger the pop over thing. I find the prompting at the top of the page to be nuisance and people are likely to turn it off so they don't get prompted all the time. Advertisers and malicious sites will find a way to make it appear and then offer helpful instructions for getting rid of it. I would say for sites, that just push flash without detection, change from the missing puzzle piece icon to a non-obtrusive "run this flash content" play button. You could even add a checkbox to "always play content for this site". That way there's no annoying flash pop over and you only run flash when the user demands it on a case by case basis. This will have the added effect of encouraging content producers to migrate because heavily flash laden pages will just look ridiculous. For sites, that try to detect Flash, display their "you need flash" messages and respond accordingly to clicks to install. The potential risk here is that people will become accustom to these prompts and a site might try to exploit that to get people to download something nasty.
eterm 10y ago
I wonder what their "top 10" whitelisted sites are? It would be odd (for example) if they whitelisted YouTube to keep that seamless while degrading other sites. (Youtube has had a decent html5 player for ages, but my point is it's a bit arbitrary to whitelist sites in this way.)
- mtgx 10y ago
  They mention the top sites at the link below: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/chromium-dev/HTML5$20by$20default/chromium-dev/0wWoRRhTA_E/__E3jf40OAAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/ch...
  - CJefferson 10y ago
    Wow, looking at that list, it really is a case of "let's break all the little guys". Why should all these big video sites get to keep Flash, while the rest of us have to jump through hoops?
    - pmarin 10y ago
      html5 video playing is pathetic on slow machines.
      - nkristoffersen 10y ago
        I'll bet a lot of modern things are pathetic on slow machines ;-)
      - angry-hacker 10y ago
        But why is it so? Why is Flash so much faster doing video?
    - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
      It's not personal, and it's not about breaking the little guys. Disabling Flash to push the web towards standardized protocols and formats is going to painful for all the browsers, and like many other changes, the biggest blocker is that one of the major vendors has to go first. Expect to see the same move from all vendors that still support flash (except for those that don't believe that flash is the devil). The Chrome team has to support the majority of their users or they risk alienating their user base, and there is a hard core browser war on out there :) They came up with a reasonable way to decide the "winners and losers", and aim to snip the long tail off. It also puts the supported sites on notice that they need to migrate functionality.
mangeletti 10y ago
> …will will intercept the request, cancel the navigation, and instead present an "Allow Flash Player…" That's a bad idea. If Flash Player is disabled by default, large sites like Pandora will learn in short order that they just need to attempt to use Flash, rather than pointing the user there. If they don't, then they will be replaced by websites that care more about their users.
binaryanomaly 10y ago
Really looking forward to finally get rid of flash and move to an html5 only world. Thumbs up!
kdamken 10y ago
While I get why it's built like this, I hate, hate, hate, hate when a slideshow is set up where each slide is a new page. If you didn't open it in a new tab, it makes going back to where you were before a nightmare.
- robmcm 10y ago
  This isn't related to flash or JS, it's a choice made by the developers/sales department. Having a new page impression for each slide is a win for advertising revenue.
  - shawabawa3 10y ago
    Recording impressions per page is separate from adding them to the browser history
  - joshstrange 10y ago
    I'm not sure if you visited the page but it's a google slideshow, no advertizing revenue and I'm not sure how much "slide" impression stuff is actually tracked on google slideshow.
    - robmcm 10y ago
      I did not, Google Docs is blocked at my work place. Apologies.
      - joshstrange 10y ago
        No problem, you had about a 99.99% chance of being right as most slideshows are exactly what you described.
asd 10y ago
I noticed the docs.google.com link and cringed. Load the document, scroll down a couple times, and attempt to click back. Yikes. http://i.imgur.com/3nhDeYP.png http://i.imgur.com/3nhDeYP.png
nye2k 10y ago
Why? If a site chooses to have a flash experience, why inhibit that? Google is bullying an already narrowed market. There are experience that Flash simply handles better, and HTML5 cannot emulate. Animated experiences are at the top of that list. The correct user experience would be seamless for both the user and the content producer. This UX is essentially warning the user that they are entering unwanted territory, and using fear to narrow the flash market.
- mtgx 10y ago
  Flash is almost as big of a security problem as Java applets were, and it's only not as big now because most browsers have started putting Flash in a sandbox.
  - dexterdog 10y ago
    And many users have been putting Flash in a trashcan.
  - nye2k 10y ago
    The entire web is a security problem. Flash has a shrinking market for several reasons, security is not a main factor of this.
    - manigandham 10y ago
      The poor security of Flash is most definitely a major factor.
    - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
      You straight up don't know what you are talking about. Every browser development team wants flash to die because of the security risks, performance, stability, and usability problems it induces. The reason the flash market has been shrinking is because browser vendors, starting with Apple have been moving towards deprecating Flash for many years because of these reasons.
    - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
ape4 10y ago
Getting rid of Flash is good. But it doesn't mean we aren't going to avoid annoying advertisements - they'll just use html5.
- stormbrew 10y ago
  In fact, the move to native HTML for dynamic advertising has made it more difficult to control browser CPU usage, since before you could cut it down a lot just by turning off flash. Now it's indistinguishable from legitimate page content.
  - ape4 10y ago
    This page wanted to create a <canvas> in a size or position that suggest it might be an ad. Allow: Yes/No/Always
shmerl 10y ago
It's a pity Shumway project died: https://github.com/mozilla/shumway https://github.com/mozilla/shumway Because despite all attempts to kick Flash off the Web, it's still lingering around.
pmarin 10y ago
For playing video HTML5 is too slow for old intel core cpus. They should spend more time optimizing whatever video codec it uses instead of depreciating a good existing solution.
wodenokoto 10y ago
When sharing google documents, use the publish feature. It allows more concurrent views and is faster for all (both the end user and Google, which can get very slow at serving highly accessed documents in the editor)

66 points by synthmeat 10y ago

I like that Google are moving to this model. It's already how some people (like me) have their browsers configured anyway. Flash is a pain, performance and battery life-wise, and it's all too often used for video ads and such. Making Flash on the web click-to-play for everyone means we're a step closer to confining Flash to the garbage can of history.

robmcm 10y ago
"Flash is a pain, performance and battery life-wise, and it's all too often used for video ads and such" Unfortunately you could easily replace Flash for JavaScript these days. I wonder how long before the default is to brows with JavaScript turned off... or is it too integral to basic web pages now? I think we will look back at the days when Flash was prevalent wish we could easily group all the advertising and cpu intensive scripts into a optional plugin.
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
  At least JS can be constrained somewhat by browser extensions.
- andybak 10y ago
  > I wonder how long before the default is to brows with JavaScript turned off... or is it too integral to basic web pages now? As Flash once was. Maybe a grass-roots revolt is needed. Something akin to Apple refusing to allow Flash on iOS. Imagine if js was throttled - or automatically disabled if a page was detected as being too resource-intensive? That would realign the incentives of user and content-producer and web-developers would find it considerably easier to argue for spending time on performance tuning. I believe Google's using pagespeed as a factor in ranking is a small step in this direction. I hope someone goes all in.
  - franciscop 10y ago
    I believe there's some limit for javascript in inactive tabs: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15871942/how-do-browsers-pause-change-javascript-when-tab-or-window-is-not-active http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15871942/how-do-browsers-...
  - ygra 10y ago
    > Imagine if js was throttled - or automatically disabled if a page was detected as being too resource-intensive? Google tried doing something in that direction, by not running functions registered with setTimeout in certain cases (a pattern that's supposedly often used by ads on a site, impacting load time), thereby breaking a whole lot of legitimate cases along the way.
    - robmcm 10y ago
      Opera has just done something like this for it's low power mode: Reduced activity in background tabs Waking CPU less often due to more optimal scheduling of JavaScript timers Automatically pausing unused plug-ins Reduced frame rate to 30 frames per second Tuning video-playback parameters and forcing usage of hardware accelerated video codecs Paused animations of browser themes http://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/05/introducing-power-saving-mode/ http://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/05/introducing-power...
- nye2k 10y ago
  You absolutely cannot easily reproduce a proper Flash experience in JavaScript, or Canvas. This is a problem we've been working on for years building animated experiences for kids, and the js "equivalent" is heavy on assets and extremely limits what the artist and developer can produce in the same amount of time.
  - robmcm 10y ago
    Sorry that should have read: "Unfortunately you could easily replace Flash for JavaScript these days [in that quote]."
  - Aldo_MX 10y ago
    > You absolutely cannot easily reproduce a proper Flash experience in JavaScript, or Canvas. Didn't Adobe Animate[1] (the successor of Flash) allow you to convert a .fla file to Canvas (or WebGL)? [1] https://helpx.adobe.com/animate/using/creating-publishing-html5-canvas-document.html#converting-to-html5 https://helpx.adobe.com/animate/using/creating-publishing-ht...
- intrasight 10y ago
  My default is to browse with JS turned off.

TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago

The title "HTML5 by Default – Draft Proposal" isn't very descriptive, unfortunately, even though it's the original title. Something along the lines of "Moving from Flash to HTML5 by default in Google Chrome" might be more helpful. I'm not sure.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
brudgers 10y ago
To me, it's not descriptive in the sense that the plan calls for whitelisting Flash on n sites by default. Which means that HTML5 isn't really the default.
- rictic 10y ago
  (For one year, then the top sites whitelist will be removed)

verandaguy 10y ago

I'm all for this proposal. It's relatively unintrusive while keeping control mostly in the hands of the user. Not sure where the official RFC/comment thread for this is, but pending finding that, it would be nice to half a mechanism similar to AdBlock's where a user can whitelist flash based on domain, subdomain, or directory[0]. I'm also against the idea of "trusting" the top ten most used domains. It justifies further telemetry by Google (I know, it's Chrome anyway), but more importantly, it puts those "trusted" sites in a position where they can take advantage of their positions to inject malicious or unwanted content into their Flash elements. [0] https://i.imgur.com/fFuAwDV.png https://i.imgur.com/fFuAwDV.png

amelius 10y ago

> When a user encounters a site that needs Flash Player, a prompt will appear at the top of the page, giving the user the option of allowing it for a site How about keeping the experience exactly the same for both cases (allow downloading of the HTML5 video source in non-flash format, by using an internal transcoder).

Fargren 10y ago
Flash is used for more than video (and ads). Flash games still exist, for example.
- sevensor 10y ago
  And homestarrunner.com! The Internet of 10-15 years ago was awash in legitimate Flash content, and we're rapidly losing the ability to view it.
  - pfooti 10y ago
    Luckily, almost all of the H*R stuff has gotten ported to youtube content. It's a little sad to not find the random easter eggs anymore, but the stuff is still there for your eeeemail pleasure. (preeeow paper noise) https://www.youtube.com/user/homestarrunnerdotcom https://www.youtube.com/user/homestarrunnerdotcom
- yoz-y 10y ago
  Flash games still exist but I doubt there are lot of new ones created. It seems that there are not that many HTML5 games created either. My theory is that it is because most of casual gaming now happens on mobile where flash is unavailable and HTML5 is subpar.
  - Fargren 10y ago
    Absolutely, very little Flash content is being created. But I still think it's not good that we are losing access to waht's already there. It could be this generation's version of link rot (which is still a problem too).

cptskippy 10y ago

Flash is used a great deal for advertisements which most people aren't going to care is missing from a page but it will still trigger the pop over thing. I find the prompting at the top of the page to be nuisance and people are likely to turn it off so they don't get prompted all the time. Advertisers and malicious sites will find a way to make it appear and then offer helpful instructions for getting rid of it. I would say for sites, that just push flash without detection, change from the missing puzzle piece icon to a non-obtrusive "run this flash content" play button. You could even add a checkbox to "always play content for this site". That way there's no annoying flash pop over and you only run flash when the user demands it on a case by case basis. This will have the added effect of encouraging content producers to migrate because heavily flash laden pages will just look ridiculous. For sites, that try to detect Flash, display their "you need flash" messages and respond accordingly to clicks to install. The potential risk here is that people will become accustom to these prompts and a site might try to exploit that to get people to download something nasty.

eterm 10y ago

I wonder what their "top 10" whitelisted sites are? It would be odd (for example) if they whitelisted YouTube to keep that seamless while degrading other sites. (Youtube has had a decent html5 player for ages, but my point is it's a bit arbitrary to whitelist sites in this way.)

mtgx 10y ago
They mention the top sites at the link below: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/chromium-dev/HTML5$20by$20default/chromium-dev/0wWoRRhTA_E/__E3jf40OAAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/ch...
- CJefferson 10y ago
  Wow, looking at that list, it really is a case of "let's break all the little guys". Why should all these big video sites get to keep Flash, while the rest of us have to jump through hoops?
  - pmarin 10y ago
    html5 video playing is pathetic on slow machines.
    - nkristoffersen 10y ago
      I'll bet a lot of modern things are pathetic on slow machines ;-)
    - angry-hacker 10y ago
      But why is it so? Why is Flash so much faster doing video?
  - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
    It's not personal, and it's not about breaking the little guys. Disabling Flash to push the web towards standardized protocols and formats is going to painful for all the browsers, and like many other changes, the biggest blocker is that one of the major vendors has to go first. Expect to see the same move from all vendors that still support flash (except for those that don't believe that flash is the devil). The Chrome team has to support the majority of their users or they risk alienating their user base, and there is a hard core browser war on out there :) They came up with a reasonable way to decide the "winners and losers", and aim to snip the long tail off. It also puts the supported sites on notice that they need to migrate functionality.

mangeletti 10y ago

> …will will intercept the request, cancel the navigation, and instead present an "Allow Flash Player…" That's a bad idea. If Flash Player is disabled by default, large sites like Pandora will learn in short order that they just need to attempt to use Flash, rather than pointing the user there. If they don't, then they will be replaced by websites that care more about their users.

binaryanomaly 10y ago

Really looking forward to finally get rid of flash and move to an html5 only world. Thumbs up!

kdamken 10y ago

While I get why it's built like this, I hate, hate, hate, hate when a slideshow is set up where each slide is a new page. If you didn't open it in a new tab, it makes going back to where you were before a nightmare.

robmcm 10y ago
This isn't related to flash or JS, it's a choice made by the developers/sales department. Having a new page impression for each slide is a win for advertising revenue.
- shawabawa3 10y ago
  Recording impressions per page is separate from adding them to the browser history
- joshstrange 10y ago
  I'm not sure if you visited the page but it's a google slideshow, no advertizing revenue and I'm not sure how much "slide" impression stuff is actually tracked on google slideshow.
  - robmcm 10y ago
    I did not, Google Docs is blocked at my work place. Apologies.
    - joshstrange 10y ago
      No problem, you had about a 99.99% chance of being right as most slideshows are exactly what you described.

asd 10y ago

I noticed the docs.google.com link and cringed. Load the document, scroll down a couple times, and attempt to click back. Yikes. http://i.imgur.com/3nhDeYP.png http://i.imgur.com/3nhDeYP.png

nye2k 10y ago

Why? If a site chooses to have a flash experience, why inhibit that? Google is bullying an already narrowed market. There are experience that Flash simply handles better, and HTML5 cannot emulate. Animated experiences are at the top of that list. The correct user experience would be seamless for both the user and the content producer. This UX is essentially warning the user that they are entering unwanted territory, and using fear to narrow the flash market.

mtgx 10y ago
Flash is almost as big of a security problem as Java applets were, and it's only not as big now because most browsers have started putting Flash in a sandbox.
- dexterdog 10y ago
  And many users have been putting Flash in a trashcan.
- nye2k 10y ago
  The entire web is a security problem. Flash has a shrinking market for several reasons, security is not a main factor of this.
  - manigandham 10y ago
    The poor security of Flash is most definitely a major factor.
  - ygjb-dupe 10y ago
    You straight up don't know what you are talking about. Every browser development team wants flash to die because of the security risks, performance, stability, and usability problems it induces. The reason the flash market has been shrinking is because browser vendors, starting with Apple have been moving towards deprecating Flash for many years because of these reasons.
  - ygjb-dupe 10y ago

ape4 10y ago

Getting rid of Flash is good. But it doesn't mean we aren't going to avoid annoying advertisements - they'll just use html5.

stormbrew 10y ago
In fact, the move to native HTML for dynamic advertising has made it more difficult to control browser CPU usage, since before you could cut it down a lot just by turning off flash. Now it's indistinguishable from legitimate page content.
- ape4 10y ago
  This page wanted to create a <canvas> in a size or position that suggest it might be an ad. Allow: Yes/No/Always

shmerl 10y ago

It's a pity Shumway project died: https://github.com/mozilla/shumway https://github.com/mozilla/shumway Because despite all attempts to kick Flash off the Web, it's still lingering around.

pmarin 10y ago

For playing video HTML5 is too slow for old intel core cpus. They should spend more time optimizing whatever video codec it uses instead of depreciating a good existing solution.

wodenokoto 10y ago

When sharing google documents, use the publish feature. It allows more concurrent views and is faster for all (both the end user and Google, which can get very slow at serving highly accessed documents in the editor)