8 ms·

Do you actually follow spec discussions, or are you just guessing? From what I have observed the Chrome, Firefox, and Safari teams are in constant communicatio

Do you actually follow spec discussions, or are you just guessing? From what I have observed the Chrome, Firefox, and Safari teams are in constant communication. They discuss new features, implementation details, and potential pitfalls. Despite all the suggestions of "browser wars", they're actually very friendly and collaborative.

IshKebab 8y ago
I think he's right. SPDY and WebP both started as Chrome-only features, and the world has essentially been forced to adopt them. So far I think that's been a good think on balance because they are good technologies. But it is worrying how much power Google has in this space.
- SquareWheel 8y ago
  SPDY was donated to the IETF for adoption into the HTTP/2 standard. Other browser vendors only implemented it at that time. WebP is a file format and doesn't fall into the normal standardization process. Browsers implement support for new file formats at their own behest.
  - xg15 8y ago
    Yes. After SPDY had already been implemented and shipped in Chrome.
    - kalmi10 8y ago
      It's not like interoperability suffered because of that. HTTP fallback was always there.
      - martin_a 8y ago
        Nevertheless it's some kind of fait accompli, especially in a market with only three main actors. Where one actor can also start using the new "standard" overnight and break lots of services for people which are not using their browsers... You know what I mean. It's some kind of enforcing to have a monopoly.
    - SquareWheel 8y ago
      Of course, that's how it works. Chrome is hardly alone in field testing their new feature proposals. You'll note that they're also willing to kill features which are not adopted, like PPAPI.
      - pcwalton 8y ago
        > You'll note that they're also willing to kill features which are not adopted, like PPAPI. After adding whitelists for Google properties like Hangouts, of course.
cmroanirgo 8y ago
The proof is in the article: > It is most likely that this will be added to other browsers like Firefox too. > Microsoft’s new version of Edge is going to be based on Chromium, so this will be available on Edge too. So, although some discussions with Firefox may have begun, it's clearly using the Microsoft decision to use Chromium as a way to force their standpoint. Note also the lack of mention of Safari. This is the kind of stuff that should go thru a central committee because different browsers will react differently to what should be a simple url.
_bxg1 8y ago
I've followed a few directly, and as a web developer I generally have my ear to the ground for these things. It's possible this feature was discussed, but the article made it sound like it wasn't in a formal capacity, and I know for a fact that Google has forced things through in the past, even when there's been active protest from people at Mozilla. And that was while Microsoft still had their own engines.

IshKebab 8y ago

I think he's right. SPDY and WebP both started as Chrome-only features, and the world has essentially been forced to adopt them. So far I think that's been a good think on balance because they are good technologies. But it is worrying how much power Google has in this space.

SquareWheel 8y ago
SPDY was donated to the IETF for adoption into the HTTP/2 standard. Other browser vendors only implemented it at that time. WebP is a file format and doesn't fall into the normal standardization process. Browsers implement support for new file formats at their own behest.
- xg15 8y ago
  Yes. After SPDY had already been implemented and shipped in Chrome.
  - kalmi10 8y ago
    It's not like interoperability suffered because of that. HTTP fallback was always there.
    - martin_a 8y ago
      Nevertheless it's some kind of fait accompli, especially in a market with only three main actors. Where one actor can also start using the new "standard" overnight and break lots of services for people which are not using their browsers... You know what I mean. It's some kind of enforcing to have a monopoly.
  - SquareWheel 8y ago
    Of course, that's how it works. Chrome is hardly alone in field testing their new feature proposals. You'll note that they're also willing to kill features which are not adopted, like PPAPI.
    - pcwalton 8y ago
      > You'll note that they're also willing to kill features which are not adopted, like PPAPI. After adding whitelists for Google properties like Hangouts, of course.

cmroanirgo 8y ago

The proof is in the article: > It is most likely that this will be added to other browsers like Firefox too. > Microsoft’s new version of Edge is going to be based on Chromium, so this will be available on Edge too. So, although some discussions with Firefox may have begun, it's clearly using the Microsoft decision to use Chromium as a way to force their standpoint. Note also the lack of mention of Safari. This is the kind of stuff that should go thru a central committee because different browsers will react differently to what should be a simple url.

_bxg1 8y ago

I've followed a few directly, and as a web developer I generally have my ear to the ground for these things. It's possible this feature was discussed, but the article made it sound like it wasn't in a formal capacity, and I know for a fact that Google has forced things through in the past, even when there's been active protest from people at Mozilla. And that was while Microsoft still had their own engines.