8 ms·
How Browsers Work
- maxxxxx 15y agoVery interesting. I am always amazed how quickly browsers can update the layout when you work with jQuery to update CSS or the DOM.
- babel17 15y agoThey refer to Tali Garsiel as "she". Sure it isn't a "he" ?
- v21 15y agoThe authors picture looks like a woman to me.
- bennysaurus 15y agoTali is a woman, correct!
- deathwarmedover 15y agoFrom her bio on Blogger: "My name is Tali Garsiel. I worked for many years as a web application developer in various projects and technologies. Both on the client and server sides. I live in Israel with my husband, 3 daughters and my cat. Yes, I'm actually a woman with a technical blog!" -- http://www.blogger.com/profile/00737791624070565735 http://www.blogger.com/profile/00737791624070565735
- nik61 15y agoBut Google Reader can't find that URL, just now.
- babel17 15y agoLol. It seems I need to do more web research... Thanks for all the down votes. What a stupid and childish site. Bye Bye Hacker News.
- Helianthus 15y agoHN has elitism problems: it's excessively worried about quality (something it can't really control as the site grows) to the extent that its group action violently downvotes certain posts--such as your rather innocent question. I guess everyone thinks you should have googled it, but we didn't have the decency to politely request that you google such information in the future? I feel you.
- Androsynth 15y agoIt's an irrelevant question and if a discussion were to spawn from it, it would detract from the actual content. This is a perfectly valid comment downvote.
- Helianthus 15y agoIt's a question about the author. It's a stupid question about the author that could easily be answered with five seconds on Google, but that doesn't make it irrelevant, except in the eyes of an indifferent, exclusionary mindset that prizes signal-to-noise-ratio above simple politeness. I ain't asking for people to _upvote_ it, just to ease off on the downvotes and maybe provide a courteous explanation.
- masterzora 15y agoThe question was a sexist double whammy (given both the assumption that "the author of a technical document can't possibly be a woman" and that "the author's gender is at all germane to this piece") that has no place anywhere, let alone HN. If anything should be downvoted, that is the perfect example of one such thing.
- Helianthus 15y agoOr maybe the speaker is from a culture that doesn't know that Tali is a Hebrew name for both boys and girls, or from a culture where Tali is only a dude's name, or... the hypothetical exceptions to your interpretation go on and on. [Ninja-edit] Your ninja-editted assumptions as to what the person meant by his question are an over-reaction: you don't _know_ that's what he meant, you're only seeing hints of it.[end ninja-edit] It could _well_ be an innocent question, and there's no sense in generating righteous indignation over two sentences.
- lloeki 15y ago> According to the StatCounter browser statistics, currently (August 2011), the usage share of Firefox, Safari and Chrome together is nearly 60%. So nowadays open source browsers are a substantial part of the browser business. Somehow this never occurred to me to aggregate it this way. I recall having read somewhere that the server-side ratio is about 70-30. It's quite a milestone as now both ends of the WWW platform have an absolute majority being open source.
- bane 15y agoIt's hard to lump Safari into that, even if webkit is open source.
- DavidChouinard 15y agoWhy so?
- monochromatic 15y agoBecause Safari isn't?
- wahnfrieden 15y agoNeither is Chrome.
- ugh 15y agoIf you use that criterium, you also can’t lump Chrome into that. I would count the engine, not the browser.
- gmartres 15y agoBut Chromium is, and there's no difference between the two beside branding and Chrome shipping with some non-free stuff: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ChromiumBrowserVsGoogleChrome https://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/ChromiumBrowserVsGoo...
- v21 15y agoThis looks like an excellent place to link someone who knows a bit of HTML, maybe some Javascript, but is curious about "real CS stuff".
- macavity23 15y agoThe bit about how browsers parse malformed html is very interesting - a useful lesson for all developers having to deal with the crap that users tend to produce! ;-)
- mapgrep 15y agoIt's also a useful lesson for people thinking about security. When something that is not actually HTML can be interpreted in a browser as HTML, there is a big potential security hole. For example: At one point, I sanitized incoming user content by parsing it as HTML and nuking almost all markup (I allowed links and italics to pass through). THEN I realized this wasn't good enough, because Firefox was parsing unclosed image tags as though they were closed. The (strict) parser I was using would pass through a user's unclosed image tag as plain text, but Firefox would load it as an image. An attacker could have used that to not only collect visitor IPs (by loading an image on his server) but also to do various things with Javascript -- an image tag can include an onload attribute. (I have no idea if Firefox still works this way, it was about five years ago.)
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- palyekar 15y agothanks for the link!