3 ms·

The mad arms race for browser functionality smells a lot like an Embrace and Extend strategy by the big players. If browsers implementations are impossibly comp

The mad arms race for browser functionality smells a lot like an Embrace and Extend strategy by the big players. If browsers implementations are impossibly complex for anyone other than large companies to implement then the concept of "open standards" doesn't mean what it used to. I'm looking forward to the inevitable renaissance of the Open Web which respects the fact that the internet is for end-users[0]. I'm sure there's a million cool things a web page _could_ do but that doesn't mean that's what users want. The web needs more end-user participation, not more functionality. An end-user focused web would focus on security and simplicity over novelty. I'm not sure where this all went so terribly wrong but I'm convinced that it won't always be like this. Disruptive change is something our industry is very good at. [0] - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8890 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8890

emteycz 6y ago
Are you sure your view aligns with the rest of users? I know many people who are happy that the browser has became a very capable app platform - both end users and app vendors. Now the end users are asking for more functionality - I see it daily in my line of work - and that needs new browser features.
jaywalk 6y ago
Are you seriously implying that browser functionalities are currently simple enough for entities smaller than "large companies" to implement?
- benjaminjosephw 6y ago
  No. The opposite. I'm trying to say that open standards aren't really open if they can't be broadly implemented.
  - jaywalk 6y ago
    So in order for you to consider a standard "open" it has to be simple? We aren't allowed to have open standards above a certain level of complexity?
    - timw4mail 6y ago
      Breadth of current standards is more of an issue, I would argue. As the number of browser standards has increased, the number of browser engines (and platforms capable of running those browser engines) has decreased, and the computing power needed for web browsing has increased.

emteycz 6y ago

Are you sure your view aligns with the rest of users? I know many people who are happy that the browser has became a very capable app platform - both end users and app vendors. Now the end users are asking for more functionality - I see it daily in my line of work - and that needs new browser features.

jaywalk 6y ago

Are you seriously implying that browser functionalities are currently simple enough for entities smaller than "large companies" to implement?

benjaminjosephw 6y ago
No. The opposite. I'm trying to say that open standards aren't really open if they can't be broadly implemented.
- jaywalk 6y ago
  So in order for you to consider a standard "open" it has to be simple? We aren't allowed to have open standards above a certain level of complexity?
  - timw4mail 6y ago
    Breadth of current standards is more of an issue, I would argue. As the number of browser standards has increased, the number of browser engines (and platforms capable of running those browser engines) has decreased, and the computing power needed for web browsing has increased.