4 ms·

Actually, Chrome dropping a feature that was removed from a spec, was a lot of code and had low adoption sounds like a good idea. Engineering is always about t

Actually, Chrome dropping a feature that was removed from a spec, was a lot of code and had low adoption sounds like a good idea. Engineering is always about trade-offs, and choosing a good balance in Chrome is what made it so popular. The parent of this comment was worried about Chrome's "dominance", but remember Chrome was the last browser to the party. Safari's dominance appears to be the reason Firefox added -webkit prefixes. If you really think the SVG feature was important and Chrome should support it, then lobby for it to be part of the standard and for other web developers to use it. But it's not a great example of Chrome pushing its whim on others.

fphhotchips 10y ago
Isn't that the point though? This is part of the standard, and was being used by developers. Not many developers, but then I'm pretty sure that there are parts of lots of standards that are barely used - doesn't mean we just go around taking them out because we feel like it. The best part of Firefox/Netscape/Chrome/Safari/Opera eating IE's lunch was that they all converged (roughly) on standards compliance, so we didn't have to have "Built for IE 6.0" stickers all over everything. Chrome ditching parts of the standard just because they don't like it is the fast track back to there.
prohor 10y ago
Yes, but the problem it is part of current standard, 2.0 is still work in progress. Also alternative API from SVG 2.0 is not yet delivered by Chrome either as far as I know.
- gsnedders 10y ago
  The Chrome team removed something that there was agreement across all browsers to deprecate, and which was made optional in a near-finished spec. Also, it's perfectly typical for drafts to be what implementers are targeting, as plenty of published specs receive almost no errata and any issues in them only get addressed in new revisions.

fphhotchips 10y ago

Isn't that the point though? This is part of the standard, and was being used by developers. Not many developers, but then I'm pretty sure that there are parts of lots of standards that are barely used - doesn't mean we just go around taking them out because we feel like it. The best part of Firefox/Netscape/Chrome/Safari/Opera eating IE's lunch was that they all converged (roughly) on standards compliance, so we didn't have to have "Built for IE 6.0" stickers all over everything. Chrome ditching parts of the standard just because they don't like it is the fast track back to there.

prohor 10y ago

Yes, but the problem it is part of current standard, 2.0 is still work in progress. Also alternative API from SVG 2.0 is not yet delivered by Chrome either as far as I know.

gsnedders 10y ago
The Chrome team removed something that there was agreement across all browsers to deprecate, and which was made optional in a near-finished spec. Also, it's perfectly typical for drafts to be what implementers are targeting, as plenty of published specs receive almost no errata and any issues in them only get addressed in new revisions.