5 ms·

> But what if you didn't have to implement all of them? In that case the browser would fail to render or even load some websites, which would convey the idea t

> But what if you didn't have to implement all of them? In that case the browser would fail to render or even load some websites, which would convey the idea that the browser was a poor piece of software.

brundolf 6y ago
Usually when a feature - especially a CSS feature - is missing, a site degrades gracefully. This varies between features of course, which could be another factor in prioritizing them: how dramatically will the absence of this break something? But if a CSS property is invoked that the browser doesn't know about, it simply ignores it and moves on. The same goes for HTML tags and attributes. This is less true for JavaScript features because accessing a field of an object or attempting to call a function that doesn't exist will throw an exception and cease execution. Though on sites whose JS is mostly peripheral to the content, this can still sometimes result in a mostly-functional site. You could also play a game where you stub out enough of the APIs to prevent exceptions being thrown, without actually fully implementing the features. i.e. make an API function callable, and just not do anything. The idea isn't to write off parts of the web entirely, but to be smart about how things are prioritized and aim for graceful degradation of the overall experience, as a way of dramatically lowering the bar for what it takes to make a browser that could be reasonably used day-to-day.
frereubu 6y ago
Initially I imagine anyone who downloaded this browser would know exactly what they were getting into. I'd download something like this if it was noticeably faster and leaner than other browsers, as long as I could do some kind of quick switch to another, like I do with bangs for Google on Duck Duck Go.
- brundolf 6y ago
  The quick-switch idea is interesting. I don't really know how it would work here (embedded Chromium?), but I think the analogy to DuckDuckGo is the right one. DuckDuckGo started as a service for privacy-enthusiasts, and as privacy awareness has become more mainstream we've seen mainstream adoption of it despite its shortcomings compared to Google's results. It a) offered something Google couldn't, and b) became "good enough" on the other axes, and that was enough for regular people to adopt it.
  - frereubu 6y ago
    I presume it would in a similar fashion to Zoom on Mac (I have't used Windows in a while) where Firefox prompts you to open a Zoom meeting link in another application (i.e. Zoom), which you can ask FF to remember so the link is automatically opened with that app next time.
    - brundolf 6y ago
      Hmm. I think the destination app has to support that directly though, doesn't it? http: links should automatically go to your default browser, of course, but that would require that this new browser is not your default browser. Maybe you could hack around it in some way; I'm not a native desktop app developer so I don't really know just how much leeway one of those has within the host system.

brundolf 6y ago

Usually when a feature - especially a CSS feature - is missing, a site degrades gracefully. This varies between features of course, which could be another factor in prioritizing them: how dramatically will the absence of this break something? But if a CSS property is invoked that the browser doesn't know about, it simply ignores it and moves on. The same goes for HTML tags and attributes. This is less true for JavaScript features because accessing a field of an object or attempting to call a function that doesn't exist will throw an exception and cease execution. Though on sites whose JS is mostly peripheral to the content, this can still sometimes result in a mostly-functional site. You could also play a game where you stub out enough of the APIs to prevent exceptions being thrown, without actually fully implementing the features. i.e. make an API function callable, and just not do anything. The idea isn't to write off parts of the web entirely, but to be smart about how things are prioritized and aim for graceful degradation of the overall experience, as a way of dramatically lowering the bar for what it takes to make a browser that could be reasonably used day-to-day.

frereubu 6y ago

Initially I imagine anyone who downloaded this browser would know exactly what they were getting into. I'd download something like this if it was noticeably faster and leaner than other browsers, as long as I could do some kind of quick switch to another, like I do with bangs for Google on Duck Duck Go.

brundolf 6y ago
The quick-switch idea is interesting. I don't really know how it would work here (embedded Chromium?), but I think the analogy to DuckDuckGo is the right one. DuckDuckGo started as a service for privacy-enthusiasts, and as privacy awareness has become more mainstream we've seen mainstream adoption of it despite its shortcomings compared to Google's results. It a) offered something Google couldn't, and b) became "good enough" on the other axes, and that was enough for regular people to adopt it.
- frereubu 6y ago
  I presume it would in a similar fashion to Zoom on Mac (I have't used Windows in a while) where Firefox prompts you to open a Zoom meeting link in another application (i.e. Zoom), which you can ask FF to remember so the link is automatically opened with that app next time.
  - brundolf 6y ago
    Hmm. I think the destination app has to support that directly though, doesn't it? http: links should automatically go to your default browser, of course, but that would require that this new browser is not your default browser. Maybe you could hack around it in some way; I'm not a native desktop app developer so I don't really know just how much leeway one of those has within the host system.