5 ms·

Better late than never?

by darinf 5y ago

JimDabell 5y ago
Why are you saying this is late? The specification is a draft, the only other rendering engine to support it is Blink, and Firefox isn’t going to implement the full spec.
- darinf 5y ago
  Because over a decade ago the Apple devs poo-poo’d all over the premise of this API when it was first proposed. I’m referring to its earlier incantation that we added to WebKit and shipped in Chrome but could never get Apple devs to support. I’m delighted to see it supported now. I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been.
  - JimDabell 5y ago
    Who is the “we” you are referring to? > I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been. This doesn’t seem like it enables anything new though? It’s a convenience.
    - jefftk 5y ago
      > Who is the “we” you are referring to? Darin used to be something like my boss's boss's boss's boss when I worked in Chrome.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > Because over a decade ago the Apple devs poo-poo’d all over the premise of this API when it was first proposed. What I read is: Apple devs came back with a list of problems and issues as long as Jupiter's equator, Chrome said "we don't care" and shipped it? > I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been. With Chrome not rushing it's own broken insecure implementations of internal APIs, not pretending they are standards and not gaslighting other browser vendors? Oh, the Web would be a much, much better place.
- throw_m239339 5y ago
  Cause Chrome implemented that eons ago. Of course Firefox isn't going to implement anything, Firefox has been a thorn on the side of web standards for a good decade now, thanks to Mozilla's management.
  - chrismorgan 5y ago
    Chrome implemented and shipped an early draft and has, I believe, broken it multiple times since. What it shipped has significant security implications that are handled poorly at best (mostly not at all). Firefox and Safari have said “you what!? No way we’re implementing that as it is”. And Safari are now implementing the safe and boring part of the spec, not the part that people actually want.
  - JimDabell 5y ago
    > Cause Chrome implemented that eons ago. Of course Firefox isn't going to implement anything If Chrome matters, Firefox doesn’t, and Safari is measured against when Chrome supports something rather than when the specification becomes stable, it sounds like you think the web is defined by “whatever Chrome supports, whenever Chrome supports it”.
    - throw_m239339 5y ago
      Good web standards are whatever simplify my work as a developer. Firefox used to be at the forefront of web standards. I can guarantee you Firefox will eventually be running Blink because Mozilla has no vision for the future of the web anymore. Mark my words.
      - JimDabell 5y ago
        Do you remember the last time we had a near monoculture for browsers? People with attitudes like yours were all too happy to think of Internet Explorer as the only browser that mattered. Microsoft decided they had won and mothballed Internet Explorer development. We then had a dark ages for web developers with five years of no progress in browser functionality. Positioning Chrome as the definition of the web is incredibly harmful for the long-term health of the web. A web independent of a single vendor is vital.
- The_rationalist 5y ago

Better late than never?

by darinf 5y ago

Better late than never?

Why are you saying this is late? The specification is a draft, the only other rendering engine to support it is Blink, and Firefox isn’t going to implement the full spec.

darinf 5y ago
Because over a decade ago the Apple devs poo-poo’d all over the premise of this API when it was first proposed. I’m referring to its earlier incantation that we added to WebKit and shipped in Chrome but could never get Apple devs to support. I’m delighted to see it supported now. I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been.
- JimDabell 5y ago
  Who is the “we” you are referring to? > I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been. This doesn’t seem like it enables anything new though? It’s a convenience.
  - jefftk 5y ago
    > Who is the “we” you are referring to? Darin used to be something like my boss's boss's boss's boss when I worked in Chrome.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > Because over a decade ago the Apple devs poo-poo’d all over the premise of this API when it was first proposed. What I read is: Apple devs came back with a list of problems and issues as long as Jupiter's equator, Chrome said "we don't care" and shipped it? > I just think of all the lost time for the web and what could have been. With Chrome not rushing it's own broken insecure implementations of internal APIs, not pretending they are standards and not gaslighting other browser vendors? Oh, the Web would be a much, much better place.
throw_m239339 5y ago
Cause Chrome implemented that eons ago. Of course Firefox isn't going to implement anything, Firefox has been a thorn on the side of web standards for a good decade now, thanks to Mozilla's management.
- chrismorgan 5y ago
  Chrome implemented and shipped an early draft and has, I believe, broken it multiple times since. What it shipped has significant security implications that are handled poorly at best (mostly not at all). Firefox and Safari have said “you what!? No way we’re implementing that as it is”. And Safari are now implementing the safe and boring part of the spec, not the part that people actually want.
- JimDabell 5y ago
  > Cause Chrome implemented that eons ago. Of course Firefox isn't going to implement anything If Chrome matters, Firefox doesn’t, and Safari is measured against when Chrome supports something rather than when the specification becomes stable, it sounds like you think the web is defined by “whatever Chrome supports, whenever Chrome supports it”.
  - throw_m239339 5y ago
    Good web standards are whatever simplify my work as a developer. Firefox used to be at the forefront of web standards. I can guarantee you Firefox will eventually be running Blink because Mozilla has no vision for the future of the web anymore. Mark my words.
    - JimDabell 5y ago
      Do you remember the last time we had a near monoculture for browsers? People with attitudes like yours were all too happy to think of Internet Explorer as the only browser that mattered. Microsoft decided they had won and mothballed Internet Explorer development. We then had a dark ages for web developers with five years of no progress in browser functionality. Positioning Chrome as the definition of the web is incredibly harmful for the long-term health of the web. A web independent of a single vendor is vital.
The_rationalist 5y ago