3 ms·
> On the other hand, literally every single workaround I’ve had to write in the recent past in web related code has been due to Safari's princessness. On a rec
by manchmalscott 3y ago
> On the other hand, literally every single workaround I’ve had to write in the recent past in web related code has been due to Safari's princessness.
On a recent project I was working on, I noticed that having a long list of items in an overflow: scroll container would still allow the root page to scroll as far down as the items theoretically would. You could just scroll far past the actual HTML root tag because somewhere on the page I had a long scrollable list.
The catch? I only noticed this on Safari.... and Chrome. Firefox is the only browser that doesn't shit the bed on that page.
I just find it amusing that the most annoying problem I've experienced recently with web dev was not because of Safari's "princessness" (it was doing the exact same thing as Chrome), but just because browser engines have become complex enough to be eldritch gods we just have to pray to and hope.
Finally, parity with the desktop.
- mnvrth 3y ago+1 for your invocation of eldritch gods :) I know what you're saying, there is undoubtedly a complexity angle too, not all of it is malice. But after a while, one starts noticing the pattern (or maybe it is just me) that Safari has a holier-than-thou attitude towards standards. Their way of standardization is - I'll just go ahead and do something my own way, and then rest will just follow suit because I have so much market share. Which isn't, as you say, far from Chrome's actions in theory. But in practice, the feeling I've been getting recently is that more Chrome is happy to accommodate. Safari seems to (intentionally or culturally) drag its feet a lot more in picking up stuff that has been ratified.