4 ms·
I kind of wish there was a spec defining a minimum set JS/web APIs, rather than just “whatever X% of visitors’ browsers support”. Like a “web core” that would a
by schemescape 4y ago
I kind of wish there was a spec defining a minimum set JS/web APIs, rather than just “whatever X% of visitors’ browsers support”. Like a “web core” that would actually be feasible to implement.
This is not a suggestion, but something like enough to get HTMX or React rendering, plus “fetch”.
What I’m getting at is a middle ground between “no JavaScript, a la Dillo” and “basically an entire OS with a million subtle security concerns”.
- schemescape 4y agoI feel weird replying to myself, but another thought: is there a database of which web features are most used across sites? Sort of like the inverse of caniuse. More like “should I implement?”
- mock-possum 4y agoSeems like a cool idea - you’d just have to figure out where to get the stats from.
- forgotmypw17 4y agoYou can check out my website, which is almost like an Acid0 test, supporting most 2.0+ browsers including Dillo and Netscape. Try the browser test under Help.
- userbinator 4y agoHTML4 + CSS2 + ES5? I believe that would be roughly equivalent to what mainstream browsers would've had around 10 years ago.
- schemescape 4y agoThat’s a good thought, although I was more thinking about something up-to-date, just smaller. I think ES5 didn’t even have “let” :) There have been a lot of improvements, in addition to the obvious bloat/creep.
- mock-possum 4y agoYeah back in my day we didn’t even have let or const, we had var and we liked it! We were lucky to have it! You kids nowadays with your const and your fat arrow functions, you don’t know how good you have it.