6 ms·

Please see https://developer.chrome.com/blog/capabilities/#how-will-we-design-implement-these-new-capabilities https://developer.chrome.com/blog/capabilities/#h

Please see https://developer.chrome.com/blog/capabilities/#how-will-we-design-implement-these-new-capabilities https://developer.chrome.com/blog/capabilities/#how-will-we-... for the actual process. Nothing happens behind closed doors; other vendors can chime in at any time, and are actually very much encouraged to do so.

dmitriid 4y ago
That's a nice sentiment at the link. The reality is that Chrome ships hundreds of APIs with little to no input and only barely notifies other browser vendors that "yeah, we're shipping it". We're literally in the discussion about File System API that is: - not on any standards track - considered harmful by other browser vendors - shipped by default in Chrome Edit: I can give several examples from Web Transport to HID to Constructible Stylesheets that were either shipped with no input from other vendors, or shipped against the multiple objections from other browser vendors. And that's just the ones I know about.
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  Simply not true but believe what you need to.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    I literally provided just some of the examples. Those are easily verifiable. Web Transport is shipped by default. What was the input from other browsers? Here's the timeline for HID: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459#issuecomment-886271967 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459#is... Constructible Stylesheets: the spec contained a trivially reproducible race condition, the API was badly specified. Google shipped against any objections and refused to bring it back under the flag. Full discussion here: https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45 https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45. Shipped in Chrome https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45#issuecomment-577781329 https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45#issu... (may be hidden on mobile) despite multiple unresolved issues. Two years later Chrome did add a better API that people originally requested, other issues potentially remain. You may believe in benevolent Google working hand in hand with others for the betterment of the web. The reality is radically different. Edit: more about hardware APIs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34356651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34356651 Edit2: As to the number of APIs, Chrome actually tracks how much they ship: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
    - simonw 4y ago
      What do you think of the Chrome origin trial process?
      - dmitriid 4y ago
        It's a good idea, or at least originally it was a good idea. In reality it devolved to, well, see the links I provided. Edit: Note: those three are the ones I remember because I was reading about them at the time, or participating in some form in the discussion. How many are there that just slip through? Well, you can kinda see for yourself (second hand guessing, by proxy etc.): 1. MDN lists various web APIs, including experimental ones: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API Almost every single one that's marked "experimental" is shipped by default in Chrome 2. Mozilla lists its position on various standards. Almost all of those marked as "considered harmful/negative" are shipped by default in Chrome https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ (exceptions are a few deprecated and removed ones like HTML Imports) 3. Chrome currently ships 1100 more APIs more than Firefox: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence (note: a single standard like "File System Access API" may expose dozens of these APIs) Is it because Firefox is lagging, or is it because Chrome just powers through, all consensus be damned?
    - encryptluks2 4y ago
      Can you just slow down for a moment and focus on what you said? > We're literally in the discussion about File System API that is: > - not on any standards track As others have pointed out the standard is here: https://fs.spec.whatwg.org/ https://fs.spec.whatwg.org/ > - considered harmful by other browser vendors It is literally being drafted in conjunction by all the major browsers. > - shipped by default in Chrome So what? I for one am thankful that Chromium enables features earlier than other browsers. If you don't want the Chromium implementation then don't use it.
      - dmitriid 4y ago
        > As others have pointed out the standard is here: As others also pointed out, it's a different standard. File System: Mozilla isn't opposed File System Access API: considered harmful There are parts (of whichever spec) that neither Mozilla nor Safari are opposed to like Private Origin File System. That one ships across all browsers. > So what? Ah yes. So what if a dominant browser ships features without any consensus, against objections, with badly written specs, or with glaring issues. As to "don't use it", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31905404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31905404
  - kevingadd 4y ago
    Has been true since the days of Web Audio and is still true. Context: I was a member of both the Firefox and Chrome development teams at different points.

dmitriid 4y ago

That's a nice sentiment at the link. The reality is that Chrome ships hundreds of APIs with little to no input and only barely notifies other browser vendors that "yeah, we're shipping it". We're literally in the discussion about File System API that is: - not on any standards track - considered harmful by other browser vendors - shipped by default in Chrome Edit: I can give several examples from Web Transport to HID to Constructible Stylesheets that were either shipped with no input from other vendors, or shipped against the multiple objections from other browser vendors. And that's just the ones I know about.

encryptluks2 4y ago
Simply not true but believe what you need to.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  I literally provided just some of the examples. Those are easily verifiable. Web Transport is shipped by default. What was the input from other browsers? Here's the timeline for HID: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459#issuecomment-886271967 https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/459#is... Constructible Stylesheets: the spec contained a trivially reproducible race condition, the API was badly specified. Google shipped against any objections and refused to bring it back under the flag. Full discussion here: https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45 https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45. Shipped in Chrome https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45#issuecomment-577781329 https://github.com/WICG/construct-stylesheets/issues/45#issu... (may be hidden on mobile) despite multiple unresolved issues. Two years later Chrome did add a better API that people originally requested, other issues potentially remain. You may believe in benevolent Google working hand in hand with others for the betterment of the web. The reality is radically different. Edit: more about hardware APIs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34356651 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34356651 Edit2: As to the number of APIs, Chrome actually tracks how much they ship: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence
  - simonw 4y ago
    What do you think of the Chrome origin trial process?
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      It's a good idea, or at least originally it was a good idea. In reality it devolved to, well, see the links I provided. Edit: Note: those three are the ones I remember because I was reading about them at the time, or participating in some form in the discussion. How many are there that just slip through? Well, you can kinda see for yourself (second hand guessing, by proxy etc.): 1. MDN lists various web APIs, including experimental ones: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API Almost every single one that's marked "experimental" is shipped by default in Chrome 2. Mozilla lists its position on various standards. Almost all of those marked as "considered harmful/negative" are shipped by default in Chrome https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/ (exceptions are a few deprecated and removed ones like HTML Imports) 3. Chrome currently ships 1100 more APIs more than Firefox: https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence https://web-confluence.appspot.com/#!/confluence (note: a single standard like "File System Access API" may expose dozens of these APIs) Is it because Firefox is lagging, or is it because Chrome just powers through, all consensus be damned?
  - encryptluks2 4y ago
    Can you just slow down for a moment and focus on what you said? > We're literally in the discussion about File System API that is: > - not on any standards track As others have pointed out the standard is here: https://fs.spec.whatwg.org/ https://fs.spec.whatwg.org/ > - considered harmful by other browser vendors It is literally being drafted in conjunction by all the major browsers. > - shipped by default in Chrome So what? I for one am thankful that Chromium enables features earlier than other browsers. If you don't want the Chromium implementation then don't use it.
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      > As others have pointed out the standard is here: As others also pointed out, it's a different standard. File System: Mozilla isn't opposed File System Access API: considered harmful There are parts (of whichever spec) that neither Mozilla nor Safari are opposed to like Private Origin File System. That one ships across all browsers. > So what? Ah yes. So what if a dominant browser ships features without any consensus, against objections, with badly written specs, or with glaring issues. As to "don't use it", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31905404 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31905404
- kevingadd 4y ago
  Has been true since the days of Web Audio and is still true. Context: I was a member of both the Firefox and Chrome development teams at different points.