4 ms·

Not supported in Firefox and Safari. Also it seems most people forget that the more bloated the web platform is, the more resources are needed to develop and ma

• zeroCalories 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  • zb3 11mo ago
    > How did this happen? That's pretty simple - Google has poured tons of money into Chrome and Mozilla. Google is not a charity so this was a strategic investment. > You should go over to the CSS working group and let them know That wouldn't work, money is what ultimately matters there.
    • zeroCalories 11mo ago
      [flagged]
      • singpolyma3 11mo ago
        lol. What other browser vendors? Whatwg is just google is a trench coat. Edge is chrome. Firefox is funded by Google. So I guess apple who's main contribution is being years behind and having half their stuff be broken
        • zeroCalories 11mo ago
          There's this really cool site where you can see how well supported a feature is: https://caniuse.com/?search=if https://caniuse.com/?search=if If Google controls everything, why is if() only supported on 59% traffic? Do you think any serious company will let their site break on 40% of clients? Do you think Apple's opinion is unimportant?
          • homebrewer 11mo ago
            Did you look at detailed usage stats? More specifically at things that do not count towards that 59%: older versions of Chrome add another 20%, various Chromium forks add a few percent more, so the rest of the internet accounts for less than 20%. I'd say this is pretty monopolistic for one company to control the means of more than 80% of traffic of doing its 'trafficking'.
            • zeroCalories 11mo ago
              If you've ever ran a serious website you'd know most of those Chrome uses are poor third worlders that aren't worth much as users.
      • zb3 11mo ago
        > And the other browser vendors with conflicitng interests just go along with it? When there's a conflict of interest they don't (Apple refuses to implement some APIs that would help making their walled garden app store more obsolete). But just maintaining a duopoly (Mozilla is funded by Google) is not a conflicting interest itself. > Did you come to that opinion after engaging in the discussions with them? With employees? There's no point. If you have a well paid job you will never accept the fact that what you're doing might not be so good after all..
        • zeroCalories 11mo ago
          > When there's a conflict of interest they don't (Apple refuses to implement some APIs that would help making their walled garden app store more obsolete). But just maintaining a duopoly (Mozilla is funded by Google) is not a conflicting interest itself. What makes you think Apple wants to maintain any sort of duopoly? Do you think they're happy that Edge became a Chrome skin? > With employees? There's no point. If you have a well paid job you will never accept the fact that what you're doing might not be so good after all.. Damn, so you haven't even tried discussing your issues with the people responsible? You seem to have a really strong opinion on something you haven't engaged with at all.
• lenkite 11mo ago
  They just need to start deprecating and removing old features. They had no issues with XSLT removal even when some major sites like the library of congress used it. So the excuse of backward compatability has already proven to be a lie.
  • tgv 11mo ago
    Yeah. Font-size and width, be gone!
    • lenkite 11mo ago
      I think you mean "be gone" to only px based font-size right ? And instead of "width", use "inline-size". Instead of "height", use "block-size".
  • alwillis 10mo ago
    > They just need to start deprecating and removing old features. That's not going to happen. They can't break millions of websites by removing old features. Besides, for the most part, current developers can ignore most of the old stuff. But a site made in 1997 has to render on current browsers.