4 ms·
It would be incredible if we could pull it into the javascript/wasm sandbox and get xslt 3.0 support. The best of both worlds, at the cost of a performance hit
by webstrand 1y ago
It would be incredible if we could pull it into the javascript/wasm sandbox and get xslt 3.0 support. The best of both worlds, at the cost of a performance hit on those pages, but not a terrible cost.
- NoGravitas 1y agoThis is clearly the Right Thing. So what do you suppose the chance of it happening is?
- bilog 1y agoThere's even a JS implementation of XSLT 3.0 already (SaxonJS).
- webstrand 1y agoThat's pretty cool, its too bad the license is a bit confusing about whether bundling with Chrome or Firefox would be permissible under the license.
- dev0001 1y agoNot really, because that would add a dependency on Javascript whereas, at the moment, XSLT works without Javascript enabled.
- dpassens 1y agoNot necessarily. The idea is that this is browser-internal, so presumably it would still work even if JS from external sources is disabled.
- colejohnson66 1y agoNo. The idea is that website authors do the work. The proposal suggests the browsers wholesale remove support and forget about it. https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11523#issuecomment-3155739198 https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/11523#issuecomment-315...
- dpassens 1y agoOh, I understand that that's the WHATWG proposal. I'm talking about webstrand's idea.