3 ms·
The challenge lies in trying not to break any user-facing website functionality. Things like single sign-on, login with Google/FB, Share and Tweet This buttons,
by om2 9y ago
The challenge lies in trying not to break any user-facing website functionality. Things like single sign-on, login with Google/FB, Share and Tweet This buttons, CDNs for static content, etc. We also had a goal of not blocking ads. These limitations require a more complex feature, but it can be on by default without upsetting users or publishers.
- bradgessler 9y agoI can't upvote the complexity concerns in here enough. In effect you've banned 3rd party cookies, or at least that's the assumption that a lot of us will have to make to support Safari users because the state of their browser is harder to determine.
- om2 9y agoYou should definitely code websites as if you don't have third-party cookies. It's always been our intent to ban them, and we're closing the loopholes as much as we can without breaking the web.
- bradgessler 9y agoYeah, we had to assume that because of the way iframes work in Safari. Its obviously great for privacy, but very frustrating from an application developer perspective. Too bad the interwebs are becoming more hostile and require these measures. IMO the Webkit team would make developers' lives much easier if you more clearly articulated that intent; otherwise they have to guess the direction your team is heading and might build something in the short term that ends up breaking.
- bigbugbag 9y agoPeople aware of third party cookies usually disable them anyways, so don't assume third party cookies support is a given.