3 ms·

I've been working on web extensions for multiple browsers lately. Chrome and Firefox have workable ecosystems and accept more or less the same code, but packag

I've been working on web extensions for multiple browsers lately. Chrome and Firefox have workable ecosystems and accept more or less the same code, but package it differently. Edge accepts almost the same code, but they had to change the "chrome" namespace to "browser". I suppose it was a question of pride. Also, Edge doesn't have a workable way to publish and to inline-install web extensions. Safari accepts similar code to the rest, but organized differently. They have a slow and ponderous process for approving extensions for their store. They don't offer anything remotely resembling inline installation.

ivm 9y ago
Safari has a different API that is also very limited compared to Chrome/FF. I recently tried to port my Chrome extension to Safari (which I actually use as my main browser) and failed because of the lack of many necessary calls like a check for idle or if the app is in focus.
Manishearth 9y ago
> but they had to change the "chrome" namespace to "browser" It's weird, because Firefox internally has had the "chrome" namespace long before Google Chrome existed. In browser terminology the browser "chrome" is the stuff that's outside the browser engine -- the stuff that doesn't handle loading/laying out/rendering/javascripting a page. I.e. the tab strip, URL bar, bookmarks, context menus, settings, etc. IIRC (very unsure of this, but have heard it from different non-google sources) the name "Google Chrome" is actually a joke on this because it had the least chrome amongst browsers of the time (remember the toolbar and status bar?)
- Slackwise 9y ago
  > IIRC (very unsure of this, but have heard it from different non-google sources) the name "Google Chrome" is actually a joke on this because it had the least chrome amongst browsers of the time (remember the toolbar and status bar?) Well, that and it was Google.com's "chrome".

ivm 9y ago

Safari has a different API that is also very limited compared to Chrome/FF. I recently tried to port my Chrome extension to Safari (which I actually use as my main browser) and failed because of the lack of many necessary calls like a check for idle or if the app is in focus.

Manishearth 9y ago

> but they had to change the "chrome" namespace to "browser" It's weird, because Firefox internally has had the "chrome" namespace long before Google Chrome existed. In browser terminology the browser "chrome" is the stuff that's outside the browser engine -- the stuff that doesn't handle loading/laying out/rendering/javascripting a page. I.e. the tab strip, URL bar, bookmarks, context menus, settings, etc. IIRC (very unsure of this, but have heard it from different non-google sources) the name "Google Chrome" is actually a joke on this because it had the least chrome amongst browsers of the time (remember the toolbar and status bar?)

Slackwise 9y ago
> IIRC (very unsure of this, but have heard it from different non-google sources) the name "Google Chrome" is actually a joke on this because it had the least chrome amongst browsers of the time (remember the toolbar and status bar?) Well, that and it was Google.com's "chrome".