3 ms·

This is exactly the sort of propaganda which encourages making sites that don't work in any browser but Google's. If web developers would just focus on making s

This is exactly the sort of propaganda which encourages making sites that don't work in any browser but Google's. If web developers would just focus on making simple and widely-accessible sites instead of churnful trendchasing, the browser monopoly wouldn't exist. Bramus is a frontend web developer from Belgium, working as a Chrome Developer Relations Engineer at Google. Exactly.

IncreasePosts 2y ago
Either it will be popular enough that other browsers will implement the open standard, or it will not be popular and no one will implement it in other browsers and few sites will use it. Mozilla has a revenue of like $600M. They should have no problem keeping up with popular w3c standards. Hell, even opera, with only a tiny fraction of users can keep up.
- nemomarx 2y ago
  isn't opera just chrome now? that would obviously let them keep up
  - g8oz 2y ago
    Yeah Opera uses Blink just like Chrome. Vivaldi browser, created by Opera's original team does as well.
tkcranny 2y ago
I agree Google has too much market share and sway over plenty of browser features. However… CSS features are a W3C specification and are an early stage [1]. It’s a process that vendors draft and agree on and can terminate. On top of that I wouldn’t characterise improving css with functions isn’t a _churnful trendchasing_. If anything this will improve accessibility because it’ll be easier to manage size, colour, and motion preferences with better abstractions than media queries everywhere. [1] https://drafts.csswg.org/css-mixins/ https://drafts.csswg.org/css-mixins/
- userbinator 2y ago
  At this point the W3C is basically under control of Google anyway.
  - charliesbot 2y ago
    Non sense. Read the reply: this is a feature that is coming to all major browsers
    - userbinator 2y ago
      coming to all major browsers Chrome, Chrome, Chrome, and Chrome?
      - lolinder 2y ago
        Too many on HN seem to forget that Safari exists and has a large market share. If you break Safari then no one on an iPhone or iPad can use your site. That's an unacceptable level of breakage for almost every site, and is enough to ensure that if Apple doesn't implement it it won't be used. Ironically, Apple's walled garden is the last thing standing between Google and total web dominance.
        rchaud 2y ago
        > If you break Safari then no one on an iPhone or iPad can use your site. A CSS issue is not going to break any site unless it causes interactive elements to overlap or be hidden from view. Most sites do not implement bleeding-edge features for this reason. Those that want to set it up will do it in such a way that there's a fallback for browsers that don't support that function.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
spankalee 2y ago
Sorry, this is a ridiculous claim. This spec has been worked on for years in the CSSWG with participation from multiple browser implementers, Igalia, and other community members. Custom functions have been a huge web developer request for a long, long time and is one of the remaining gaps between standard CSS and Sass/LESS, after variables and nesting shipped. Mixins are next, and they'll be good too. Not every advancement in the web platform needs to be some kind of conspiracy.
namuol 2y ago
This idea has traction with other browser vendors too, FWIW. They just don’t have godlike budgets, unfortunately.
sureIy 2y ago
- Developers: Ask for something for decades - Google: It's implemented - People: Screw Google and their monopolistic tactics > If web developers would just focus on making simple That boat is long gone. The people with money don't want that, they want a platform on which to shove ads down your throat. It's successful.

IncreasePosts 2y ago

Either it will be popular enough that other browsers will implement the open standard, or it will not be popular and no one will implement it in other browsers and few sites will use it. Mozilla has a revenue of like $600M. They should have no problem keeping up with popular w3c standards. Hell, even opera, with only a tiny fraction of users can keep up.

nemomarx 2y ago
isn't opera just chrome now? that would obviously let them keep up
- g8oz 2y ago
  Yeah Opera uses Blink just like Chrome. Vivaldi browser, created by Opera's original team does as well.

tkcranny 2y ago

I agree Google has too much market share and sway over plenty of browser features. However… CSS features are a W3C specification and are an early stage [1]. It’s a process that vendors draft and agree on and can terminate. On top of that I wouldn’t characterise improving css with functions isn’t a _churnful trendchasing_. If anything this will improve accessibility because it’ll be easier to manage size, colour, and motion preferences with better abstractions than media queries everywhere. [1] https://drafts.csswg.org/css-mixins/ https://drafts.csswg.org/css-mixins/

userbinator 2y ago
At this point the W3C is basically under control of Google anyway.
- charliesbot 2y ago
  Non sense. Read the reply: this is a feature that is coming to all major browsers
  - userbinator 2y ago
    coming to all major browsers Chrome, Chrome, Chrome, and Chrome?
    - lolinder 2y ago
      Too many on HN seem to forget that Safari exists and has a large market share. If you break Safari then no one on an iPhone or iPad can use your site. That's an unacceptable level of breakage for almost every site, and is enough to ensure that if Apple doesn't implement it it won't be used. Ironically, Apple's walled garden is the last thing standing between Google and total web dominance.
      - rchaud 2y ago
        > If you break Safari then no one on an iPhone or iPad can use your site. A CSS issue is not going to break any site unless it causes interactive elements to overlap or be hidden from view. Most sites do not implement bleeding-edge features for this reason. Those that want to set it up will do it in such a way that there's a fallback for browsers that don't support that function.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

spankalee 2y ago

Sorry, this is a ridiculous claim. This spec has been worked on for years in the CSSWG with participation from multiple browser implementers, Igalia, and other community members. Custom functions have been a huge web developer request for a long, long time and is one of the remaining gaps between standard CSS and Sass/LESS, after variables and nesting shipped. Mixins are next, and they'll be good too. Not every advancement in the web platform needs to be some kind of conspiracy.

namuol 2y ago

This idea has traction with other browser vendors too, FWIW. They just don’t have godlike budgets, unfortunately.

sureIy 2y ago

- Developers: Ask for something for decades - Google: It's implemented - People: Screw Google and their monopolistic tactics > If web developers would just focus on making simple That boat is long gone. The people with money don't want that, they want a platform on which to shove ads down your throat. It's successful.