4 ms·

Just a heads up that the WebKit team hasn't weighed in, and Mozilla does not intend to look at this specification at all in the near future. So this looks like

Just a heads up that the WebKit team hasn't weighed in, and Mozilla does not intend to look at this specification at all in the near future. So this looks like another Chromium-only feature for the time being.

jameslk 6y ago
I'd like to read more about Mozilla's decision. Where did you hear about this?
- dstaley 6y ago
  https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/157 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/157
  - zokier 6y ago
    Rendered view: https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#portals https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#portals
Touche 6y ago
Good reason to dump support for Firefox imo.
- Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  Disagree; it's a draft proposal, they can weigh in and vote against it. If it's ratified and becomes a standard however, THEN they can start working on implementing it. But until then, nobody can slag off an implementer for not implementing a draft.
  - Touche 6y ago
    What specific alternative is Mozilla proposing that solves the same use-cases that portals seek to solve?
    - kuschku 6y ago
      Not every use case can be supported in a safe and secure way. Just like "update the firmware of attached USB MIDI devices via the web, without a permission popup" was something Chrome implemented, and after quite some time had to realize this might not be the best solution. Sometimes you just have to stop and think if this is really the best tool for the job, or if you should use something else instead.
      - Touche 6y ago
        So navigating from one page to another with an animation is not something that can be done in a secure way? Really? If so then the web really is dead.
        kuschku 6y ago
        Embedding one page in another is something that can not be done in a secure way in the general case. There are special cases where it is possible, but it's not possible in general.

4 ms·

Just a heads up that the WebKit team hasn't weighed in, and Mozilla does not intend to look at this specification at all in the near future. So this looks like

by dstaley 6y ago

jameslk 6y ago
I'd like to read more about Mozilla's decision. Where did you hear about this?
- dstaley 6y ago
  https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/157 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/157
  - zokier 6y ago
    Rendered view: https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#portals https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#portals
Touche 6y ago
Good reason to dump support for Firefox imo.
- Cthulhu_ 6y ago
  Disagree; it's a draft proposal, they can weigh in and vote against it. If it's ratified and becomes a standard however, THEN they can start working on implementing it. But until then, nobody can slag off an implementer for not implementing a draft.
  - Touche 6y ago
    What specific alternative is Mozilla proposing that solves the same use-cases that portals seek to solve?
    - kuschku 6y ago
      Not every use case can be supported in a safe and secure way. Just like "update the firmware of attached USB MIDI devices via the web, without a permission popup" was something Chrome implemented, and after quite some time had to realize this might not be the best solution. Sometimes you just have to stop and think if this is really the best tool for the job, or if you should use something else instead.
      - Touche 6y ago
        So navigating from one page to another with an animation is not something that can be done in a secure way? Really? If so then the web really is dead.
        kuschku 6y ago
        Embedding one page in another is something that can not be done in a secure way in the general case. There are special cases where it is possible, but it's not possible in general.