6 ms·
Instead of government leaving it up to "market share", in an industry with decades of documented history of underhanded anti-competitive behavior, how about: 1
by neilv 3y ago
Instead of government leaving it up to "market share", in an industry with decades of documented history of underhanded anti-competitive behavior, how about:
1. All government Web frontends must be compliant with one of the government-defined profiles of browser features, which are defined in terms of W3C (not WHAT, not Chrome) open standards. With sufficient penalties to motivate compliance.
2. As a practical matter, developers of government Web-based systems -- in addition to developing to documented open standards, and using open standards-based libraries/frameworks -- will be motivated to test with multiple browsers, including Firefox, because that's the most likely way that end users will discover and report noncompliance with the standards and profiles.
3. Government "apps" for non-Web platforms, such as Apple iOS and Google Android, are strongly discouraged. Furthermore, such non-Web apps by default are not compliant unless complete comparable functionality is available via compliant government Web frontends/apps. (To get permission for exceptions in extraordinary circumstances, there will be an onerous and uncertain process, and thus the motivation is to invest in the open standard Web platform for any "extraordinary" platform facilities that might be needed.)
(Also there would be regulations about backend implementations; that's just about browsers.)
- insanitybit 3y agoI don't think the government wants to (or possibly is even able to) get involved in defining web standards. Tracking market share seems like the least hands-on way to determine support as it's purely "pull based" - they follow everyone else's lead, they aren't trying to dictate what a "good" browser is. The government is generally very slow and deliberate about technology recommendations let alone requirements when it comes to generally available software.
- neilv 3y agoThere's been credible international standards since early on. The government can say "use that international standard for government systems, not these (more) proprietary and unstable things".
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoNos. 1 and 3 will win you the developer pico-vote while royally pissing everyone else off. No. 2 is the matter at hand. You need a cut-off for the multiple browsers requirement. If you don’t, you’ll find contracts to CronyCorp for testing every site against the CronyCorp browser.