6 ms·

If they were really working with standardization, they'd wait ...

Someone 3y ago
Are there any examples of using that approach in the history of web browsers? I thought that mostly boiled down to “IE/Netscape/Chrome/…” implements it, and if enough browsers implement it, we’ll document it as standard”
jedberg 3y ago
No they wouldn't. I can't think of a single thing in any browser that was implemented after a standard was created. It's always been driven by one browser just doing a thing, then other browsers do it slightly differently, then the standards body comes together and they settle on the-one-true-way and everyone updates their support to match the standard.
- mnw21cam 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - jedberg 3y ago
    Lol ok let me say "most everyone mostly matches the standard" :)
  - reaperducer 3y ago
    Oh, the boundless optimism. How cute. Oh, pointless condescension on the internet. How cute.
- mvonballmo 3y ago
  It very much used to work like this, pretty much exclusively. More recently, though (especially, the last couple of years), browser vendors work very closely with standards groups, contributing there, and looking for feedback from other browser vendors. At least in the CSS and JS space, the extensions to those standards have proceeded largely as a group effort rather than as you described.
  - dwaite 3y ago
    There's pretty much always implementations, but it is a huge headache when people rely on behavior which is not yet stable. The browsers have started to first ship things behind feature flags, and in Chrome's case also behind "Origin trials". We just have less need now for one browser to go off and define their own way for borders to be drawn as rounded rectangles. I suspect we'll see some funky CSS extensions ship pre-standardization for VR headsets, though. Things like controlling the z-axis height of <dialog> and other elements.
tantalic 3y ago
Becoming a standard requires independent, working implementations. So this is very much part of the process. https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-experience https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-exp....
- candiodari 3y ago
  It doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. This is somewhere between anti-consumer and stealing.
  - dwaite 3y ago
    > It doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. I can't quite figure out who or what in particular you are talking about. If the original topic, Apple/Safari do not charge for private click measurement, and Apple does not have any significant advertising platform for the web. There are other more controversial uses of the technique - mobile game SDKs used tracking identifiers and other techniques to try to measure conversion and associate it to a persona, which Apple shut down with ATT. Apple added a PCM-like technology at about the same time so that advertisers could get broad metrics on advertising programs and conversion. This is different/separate from more controversial uses, such as blocking in-app advertising/install conversion metrics and persona building. There, Apple _does_ have some competing interest in terms of the App Store ad platform.
ArchOversight 3y ago
Wait until Google implements something and shoves it down everyones throat in Chrome and then has all the Google fanboys claiming that its the best thing since sliced bread and thus should get implemented by every other browser just because Google did it? That's how we ended up in the situation where Google shipped U2F, sites implemented their implementation and then when the standard WebAuthN was built it was not compatible so sites had to be updated to be standards compliant, and it took a while to do so. Or when Google added WebP without clear consensus. Or when they added FLoC or Topics API, or whatever else they have cooked up. Or things like WebUSB, WebMIDI and others? There's a glut of Chrome only sites out there, and it continues to grow as web developers test just on Chrome but not the other browser engines. It's turning into the next IE 6, I remember the time there were a lot of "Made for IE 6" logos and graphics on sites and they did not render well or at all in Netscape.
- Taywee 3y ago
  "dearth" means "lack" or "scarcity". I think it's the opposite of what you meant.
  - ArchOversight 3y ago
    You are correct. Edited and replaced the word with glut. Thank you!
- bee_rider 3y ago
  As much as the locking down of iOS is annoying for everybody technical, we should be somewhat thankful that Apple has ensured a large population of mobile safari users.
  - MBCook 3y ago
    Except in every thread about iOS or Safari are a ton of people crying for real Chrome on iOS because Safari is the new IE 6 holding the web back by not implementing the new WebDogCam4 “standard” Google pushed out 2 days ago.

Are there any examples of using that approach in the history of web browsers? I thought that mostly boiled down to “IE/Netscape/Chrome/…” implements it, and if enough browsers implement it, we’ll document it as standard”

jedberg 3y ago

No they wouldn't. I can't think of a single thing in any browser that was implemented after a standard was created. It's always been driven by one browser just doing a thing, then other browsers do it slightly differently, then the standards body comes together and they settle on the-one-true-way and everyone updates their support to match the standard.

mnw21cam 3y ago
[flagged]
- jedberg 3y ago
  Lol ok let me say "most everyone mostly matches the standard" :)
- reaperducer 3y ago
  Oh, the boundless optimism. How cute. Oh, pointless condescension on the internet. How cute.
mvonballmo 3y ago
It very much used to work like this, pretty much exclusively. More recently, though (especially, the last couple of years), browser vendors work very closely with standards groups, contributing there, and looking for feedback from other browser vendors. At least in the CSS and JS space, the extensions to those standards have proceeded largely as a group effort rather than as you described.
- dwaite 3y ago
  There's pretty much always implementations, but it is a huge headache when people rely on behavior which is not yet stable. The browsers have started to first ship things behind feature flags, and in Chrome's case also behind "Origin trials". We just have less need now for one browser to go off and define their own way for borders to be drawn as rounded rectangles. I suspect we'll see some funky CSS extensions ship pre-standardization for VR headsets, though. Things like controlling the z-axis height of <dialog> and other elements.

tantalic 3y ago

Becoming a standard requires independent, working implementations. So this is very much part of the process. https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-experience https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#implementation-exp....

candiodari 3y ago
It doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. This is somewhere between anti-consumer and stealing.
- dwaite 3y ago
  > It doesn't require them to be inflicted on all of the internet. And it most definitely doesn't require you to go ahead and redirect a huge chunk of ad income to yourself while "processing" the standard. I can't quite figure out who or what in particular you are talking about. If the original topic, Apple/Safari do not charge for private click measurement, and Apple does not have any significant advertising platform for the web. There are other more controversial uses of the technique - mobile game SDKs used tracking identifiers and other techniques to try to measure conversion and associate it to a persona, which Apple shut down with ATT. Apple added a PCM-like technology at about the same time so that advertisers could get broad metrics on advertising programs and conversion. This is different/separate from more controversial uses, such as blocking in-app advertising/install conversion metrics and persona building. There, Apple _does_ have some competing interest in terms of the App Store ad platform.

ArchOversight 3y ago

Wait until Google implements something and shoves it down everyones throat in Chrome and then has all the Google fanboys claiming that its the best thing since sliced bread and thus should get implemented by every other browser just because Google did it? That's how we ended up in the situation where Google shipped U2F, sites implemented their implementation and then when the standard WebAuthN was built it was not compatible so sites had to be updated to be standards compliant, and it took a while to do so. Or when Google added WebP without clear consensus. Or when they added FLoC or Topics API, or whatever else they have cooked up. Or things like WebUSB, WebMIDI and others? There's a glut of Chrome only sites out there, and it continues to grow as web developers test just on Chrome but not the other browser engines. It's turning into the next IE 6, I remember the time there were a lot of "Made for IE 6" logos and graphics on sites and they did not render well or at all in Netscape.

Taywee 3y ago
"dearth" means "lack" or "scarcity". I think it's the opposite of what you meant.
- ArchOversight 3y ago
  You are correct. Edited and replaced the word with glut. Thank you!
bee_rider 3y ago
As much as the locking down of iOS is annoying for everybody technical, we should be somewhat thankful that Apple has ensured a large population of mobile safari users.
- MBCook 3y ago
  Except in every thread about iOS or Safari are a ton of people crying for real Chrome on iOS because Safari is the new IE 6 holding the web back by not implementing the new WebDogCam4 “standard” Google pushed out 2 days ago.