4 ms·

CSS Module Scripts is only available in Blink-based browsers. It has been accepted by Mozilla and Apple and progressed as a web standard, but it isn’t something

CSS Module Scripts is only available in Blink-based browsers. It has been accepted by Mozilla and Apple and progressed as a web standard, but it isn’t something you can use today. Part of the problem with web components is that the component can only style the slotted element and not its descendants. There’s all kinds of weird edge cases that make styling web components painful. What web developers were asking for was scoped CSS and HTML templates. How it became what it is today I don’t know, but it’s been massively overcomplicated while at the same time having really awkward limitations.

mdhb 3y ago
CSS Module scripts are only currently natively supported in blink based browsers because would you believe it Apple is years behind everyone else on web technology yet again for the millionth time. There is a simple polyfill however in the meantime which means you can actually use it today. https://github.com/guybedford/es-module-shims https://github.com/guybedford/es-module-shims
- JimDabell 3y ago
  Neither Mozilla nor Apple have implemented it; the only rendering engine to do so thus far is Blink. Why are you assigning 100% of the blame to Apple?
  - mdhb 3y ago
    Because one of them is a team that is primarily funded by grants but generally tries to do the right thing and the other is the richest company in the world who have a track record over a decade long of actively trying to cripple the web and force everyone into their walled garden. It shouldn’t be a shock that people might feel very differently about those two organisations based on their previous actions and all.
    - JimDabell 3y ago
      Mozilla has half a billion in revenue and a billion in cash reserves they seem to want to spend on anything but their browser. Mozilla is no pauper. When 1/3 rendering engines implement something, that engine is ahead. When 2/3 engines implement something, the other engine is behind. But you are so keen on dunking on Apple, you’re perceiving 1/3 engines implementing something means that just one of the other two engines is behind. That’s an incredibly lopsided way of viewing things.
      - mdhb 3y ago
        For what it’s worth it’s actually at 72% support according to Can I Use data and nothing at all like your 1/3 claim and as I mentioned has a polyfill. I don’t know why it is but almost every time I see your username pop up on HN it’s always bending over backwards to protect Apple from some perceived criticism. People are allowed to talk shit about them, they are going to be ok I promise.
        aragilar 3y ago
        That doesn't tell you how many different engines there are that support it though, only the amount of marketshare covered. Compare it to web-bluetooth (which both Apple and Mozilla have rejected and is hence not a standard): https://caniuse.com/web-bluetooth https://caniuse.com/web-bluetooth, which shows 76.24% (as of this post's time). Chromium-based broswers have it, others do not, hence it doesn't really matter what the actual percentage is, only which engines support it (and currently, of the big 3, only 1 does support it).

mdhb 3y ago

CSS Module scripts are only currently natively supported in blink based browsers because would you believe it Apple is years behind everyone else on web technology yet again for the millionth time. There is a simple polyfill however in the meantime which means you can actually use it today. https://github.com/guybedford/es-module-shims https://github.com/guybedford/es-module-shims

JimDabell 3y ago
Neither Mozilla nor Apple have implemented it; the only rendering engine to do so thus far is Blink. Why are you assigning 100% of the blame to Apple?
- mdhb 3y ago
  Because one of them is a team that is primarily funded by grants but generally tries to do the right thing and the other is the richest company in the world who have a track record over a decade long of actively trying to cripple the web and force everyone into their walled garden. It shouldn’t be a shock that people might feel very differently about those two organisations based on their previous actions and all.
  - JimDabell 3y ago
    Mozilla has half a billion in revenue and a billion in cash reserves they seem to want to spend on anything but their browser. Mozilla is no pauper. When 1/3 rendering engines implement something, that engine is ahead. When 2/3 engines implement something, the other engine is behind. But you are so keen on dunking on Apple, you’re perceiving 1/3 engines implementing something means that just one of the other two engines is behind. That’s an incredibly lopsided way of viewing things.
    - mdhb 3y ago
      For what it’s worth it’s actually at 72% support according to Can I Use data and nothing at all like your 1/3 claim and as I mentioned has a polyfill. I don’t know why it is but almost every time I see your username pop up on HN it’s always bending over backwards to protect Apple from some perceived criticism. People are allowed to talk shit about them, they are going to be ok I promise.
      - aragilar 3y ago
        That doesn't tell you how many different engines there are that support it though, only the amount of marketshare covered. Compare it to web-bluetooth (which both Apple and Mozilla have rejected and is hence not a standard): https://caniuse.com/web-bluetooth https://caniuse.com/web-bluetooth, which shows 76.24% (as of this post's time). Chromium-based broswers have it, others do not, hence it doesn't really matter what the actual percentage is, only which engines support it (and currently, of the big 3, only 1 does support it).