3 ms·

Yeah… on the one hand I don’t care about XSLT, haven’t used it in more than 20 years, and never intend to use it again. On the other… I’m still a bit uncomfort

by bartread 11mo ago

Yeah… on the one hand I don’t care about XSLT, haven’t used it in more than 20 years, and never intend to use it again. On the other… I’m still a bit uncomfortable with the proposed change because it reads as another example of Google unilaterally dictating the future of the web, which I’ve never liked or supported. Feeling quite conflicted.

righthand 11mo ago
"It didn't affect me so I didn't care." Is usually how control is amassed by Google (or authoritarians).
- bartread 11mo ago
  Very fair point, and that cuts to the root of why I’m uncomfortable with it. I mean, presumably they have the usage stats… except that plenty of enterprises deployed XSLT apps back in the day - it was on a massive portion of the job ads I was looking at in 2000 to 2002 - and I’d bet a chunk of those legacy systems are still running. I’d also bet a good chunk of those systems are running in the sort of orgs that won’t allow submission of telemetry to Google, so Google’s usage stats underreport real world usage. To me it looks like zero effort has been made to engage with Mozilla, Apple, etc., on the right way forward here - just Google high-handedly making moves and abusing their position as per usual.
  - jsnell 11mo ago
    > To me it looks like zero effort has been made to engage with Mozilla, Apple, etc., on the right way forward here - just Google high-handedly making moves and abusing their position as per usual. What would make you think that? The submission links prominently to the whatwg proposal github issue, which is the forum where that engagement would happen. It explicitly deep-links to Mozilla's and Apple's posts in that thread. It has the usage stats that you just presume exist. It's like you just made up a scenario and posted it as facts with zero effort to verify any of it.
spiffytech 11mo ago
The post indicates WHATWG has "broad agreement" about removing XSLT. I don't know how many seats Google has there, but on the surface it doesn't sound like a unilateral decision.
- indolering 11mo ago
  Mozilla and others fell out of love with XML a long time ago. Deprecation of these technologies was probably inevitable after the WHATWG pivot and when they stopped adopting new XML tech. XML and related technologies got frozen in time and JavaScript took over. The XML proponents lost this fight a long time ago. Without continued development, the user base shriveled up. Now that no one uses it, the runtimes are looking to cut dead weight. I disagree with the pivot (RIP noscript) but it's not Google making this move unilaterally. It's been in the works for a long time.
0x000xca0xfe 11mo ago
XSLT is not trendy technology but I doubt it's worse than WebBluetooth, WebUSB or WebGL from a complexity/maintenance/security perspective. This change definitely feels like moving a (tiny) step into the direction of turning the Web platform into something akin to the Android dev experience.

righthand 11mo ago

"It didn't affect me so I didn't care." Is usually how control is amassed by Google (or authoritarians).

bartread 11mo ago
Very fair point, and that cuts to the root of why I’m uncomfortable with it. I mean, presumably they have the usage stats… except that plenty of enterprises deployed XSLT apps back in the day - it was on a massive portion of the job ads I was looking at in 2000 to 2002 - and I’d bet a chunk of those legacy systems are still running. I’d also bet a good chunk of those systems are running in the sort of orgs that won’t allow submission of telemetry to Google, so Google’s usage stats underreport real world usage. To me it looks like zero effort has been made to engage with Mozilla, Apple, etc., on the right way forward here - just Google high-handedly making moves and abusing their position as per usual.
- jsnell 11mo ago
  > To me it looks like zero effort has been made to engage with Mozilla, Apple, etc., on the right way forward here - just Google high-handedly making moves and abusing their position as per usual. What would make you think that? The submission links prominently to the whatwg proposal github issue, which is the forum where that engagement would happen. It explicitly deep-links to Mozilla's and Apple's posts in that thread. It has the usage stats that you just presume exist. It's like you just made up a scenario and posted it as facts with zero effort to verify any of it.

spiffytech 11mo ago

The post indicates WHATWG has "broad agreement" about removing XSLT. I don't know how many seats Google has there, but on the surface it doesn't sound like a unilateral decision.

indolering 11mo ago
Mozilla and others fell out of love with XML a long time ago. Deprecation of these technologies was probably inevitable after the WHATWG pivot and when they stopped adopting new XML tech. XML and related technologies got frozen in time and JavaScript took over. The XML proponents lost this fight a long time ago. Without continued development, the user base shriveled up. Now that no one uses it, the runtimes are looking to cut dead weight. I disagree with the pivot (RIP noscript) but it's not Google making this move unilaterally. It's been in the works for a long time.

0x000xca0xfe 11mo ago

XSLT is not trendy technology but I doubt it's worse than WebBluetooth, WebUSB or WebGL from a complexity/maintenance/security perspective. This change definitely feels like moving a (tiny) step into the direction of turning the Web platform into something akin to the Android dev experience.