3 ms·

There's an ongoing conversation that has lasted about four years on https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2791 https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2791 regard

There's an ongoing conversation that has lasted about four years on https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2791 https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/2791 regarding whether or not browsers should implement `<include>`, (think client-side SSI, php's `include`, ngInclude, or similar fragment import functionalities from different software) which basically comes down to the four(?) editors (Mozilla, Microsoft, Google, Apple) not liking it. I noted that it's the most commented on issue in the whatwg/html discussion space, and for good reason. It's just tiring to read through discussions where a small number of people control web technologies. Oh well.

maccolgan 5y ago
At this point HTML is quickly turning into not a markup language
- dylan604 5y ago
  I miss writing HTML instead of telling Javascript how to create the HTML that I would use. I preferred JQuery's $('<htmlcodegoeshere>') vs document.createElement('element').append(document.createElement()) bullshit
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Might be worth looking at Vue and Svelte.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      nah, now i just hand it to the frontend aliens that like that stuff.
  - maccolgan 5y ago
    even when you do that, it's at least a markup language, I just don't understand how include fits into the semantics
theamk 5y ago
> four(?) editors (Mozilla, Microsoft, Google, Apple) not liking it. [...] a small number of people control web technologies Isn’t this expected? The other people can say whatever, but the final decisions will be made by people committing the code into major browsers. If they say “no, we won’t implement this”, what can others do?