4 ms·
In my opinion this is not “we agree lets remove it”. This is “we agree to explore the idea”. Google and Freed using this as a go ahead because the Mozilla guy
by righthand 1y ago
In my opinion this is not “we agree lets remove it”. This is “we agree to explore the idea”.
Google and Freed using this as a go ahead because the Mozilla guy pasted a pollyfill. However it is very clearly NOT an endorsement to remove it, even though bad actors are stating so.
> Our position is that it would be good for the long-term health of the web platform and good for user security to remove XSLT, and we support Chromium's effort to find out if it would be web compatible to remove support1. If it turns out that it's not possible to remove support, then we think browsers should make an effort to improve the fundamental security properties of XSLT even at the cost of performance.
Freed et al also explicitly chose to ignore user feedback for their own decision and not even try to improve XSLT security issues at the cost of performance.
- TingPing 1y agoLast I heard for WebKit removing it was the only outcome they saw.
- righthand 1y agoYeah all these billion dollar corporations that can’t be bothered see it as the only path forward not because of technological or practical issues, but because none of them can be asked to give a shit and plan it into their budgets. They’re MBAs who only know how to destroy and consolidate as trained.
- TingPing 1y agoI get the frustration but I don’t believe that’s really accurate. It’s not widely used and modern developers don’t see it as valuable.
- righthand 1y agoI’m a modern developer and I see it as valuable. Why side with the browser teams and ignoring user feedback? If “modern developers” actually spent time with it, they’d find it valuable. Modern developers are idiots if their constant cry is “just write it in JS”. No idea what’s inaccurate about this. A billion dollar company that has no problem pivoting otherwise, can’t fund open technology “because budgets” is simply a lie.
- shadowgovt 1y agoThe dominant user feedback is the hard statistics on how rarely it's used. You can't trim the space of "users" to just "people who already adopted the technology" in the context of the cost of browser support.
- dpark 1y ago“Everyone who uses the blink tag agrees it’s critical functionality.”
- righthand 1y agoYes excellent way to continue to diminish users of tech you don’t agree with. “The people who actually use it are wrong and don’t matter!”
- shadowgovt 1y agoI'm not personally in the business of maintaining a browser. But if I were, and I were looking to decrease cost of maintenance, "This entire rendering framework that supports a 0.02% use case" would be an outlier for chopping-block consideration. Not all corner-case features match that combination of cost-to-maintain and adoption (after, what, decades at this point?). We wouldn't be arguing the point if the feature in question were fax machine support, right?
- righthand 1y agoYes we would because people still use fax machines. I don’t understand this “everything must be a business metric because it can, therefor if I can whittle any feature as a small minority, I am forever correct and just in destroying said technology. Look at smart and savvy I am.” Totally brain dead.
- dpark 1y agoAre browser manufacturers required to support features forever no matter how low the usage is? Do you still mourn for the loss of Gopher support?
- exasperaited 1y agoXSLT in the browser was left fundamentally underdeveloped, which is why it is not really widespread. XSLT in non-browser contexts is absolutely valuable.
- shadowgovt 1y agoAgreed; as a technology, it's both clever and fun. I learned it right around the time I first touched functional programming in general and it was neat to see how you could build a chain of declarative rules to go from one document to another document. Personally, I don't think we need a dedicated native-implemented browser engine for it. But in general I'm glad the tech exists.