3 ms·
> I don't think anyone would say web-standards are excellent, well designed and well-managed. and yet: > I don't want to care about the latest flavor of front
by troupo 2y ago
> I don't think anyone would say web-standards are excellent, well designed and well-managed.
and yet:
> I don't want to care about the latest flavor of frontend insanity.
Those not well managed, not well-designed and not-well managed standards somehow get a pass because that insanity is now a part of the browser?
Do you know that Chrome argued that <dialog> should be removed from the platform because it's a bad API with multiple issues? https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/4184#issuecomment-440405059 https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/4184#issuecomment-440405...
- magicalist 2y ago> Do you know that Chrome argued that <dialog> should be removed from the platform because it's a bad API with multiple issues? That's not at all what the comment you linked to says. It says there was an open question about if <dialog> should be removed from the spec because interest hadn't materialized from Firefox and Webkit for the element after four years (and wouldn't for another two years after that).
- apsurd 2y agoWhat I'm saying is that the goal of standards and cross-platform support across time is valuable. The "open web" is a good thing for humanity. Work towards this goal is a huge shit show. And messy. But it's a good goal. The flavor-of-the-month frontend insanity is not serving this "good thing for humanity" goal as I call it. It's all well-intentioned and I'm not looking a gift horse in the mouth. But it is different.