4 ms·
Maybe it's time to add some decent looking CSS defaults to browser, but only for websites without CSS includes. Page width, better fonts, maybe even mobile spec
by butz 3y ago
Maybe it's time to add some decent looking CSS defaults to browser, but only for websites without CSS includes. Page width, better fonts, maybe even mobile specific improvements could be added. Of course, I understand that would introduce incompatibility with old websites.
- tentacleuno 3y agoThat sounds good, but it'd most likely end up as YACL (Yet Another CSS Library).
- lolinder 3y agoIf the browsers implemented it officially it wouldn't be a library, it would just be a sane default style.
- qayxc 3y agoA "sane" default style would require "default" content coupled with a "default" viewing device. None of which exist. There can't be a one-size-fits-all solution. In addition, content is more than just text - style, design, and layout are information, too.
- lolinder 3y agoI don't think anyone is suggesting that the new defaults be standardized. Each browser should pick defaults that make sense in the context they're used.
- Popeyes 3y agoDoesn't the reader view already do this?
- ezequiel-garzon 3y agoFor completely unstyled sites, reader view should be the only view. What guidelines or rules should the other/s view/s be following? I say definitely not "nostalgic" view!
- lolinder 3y ago> Of course, I understand that would introduce incompatibility with old websites. Why, though? If the website has no styling (we can exclude sites that use <font> and friends), the whole premise of HTML from very early on was that it only specifies content and the user agent controls formatting.
- jakelazaroff 3y agoThe browser is the user agent, so I don’t see why changing the default styles would contradict that.
- lolinder 3y agoThat's what I'm saying—websites that don't specify styling cannot have compatibility problems with changed default styles.