6 ms·

Props to the Safari team. They surprised us all when they suddenly shot to the top of interop-2025 this October https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/in

by culi 11mo ago

Props to the Safari team. They surprised us all when they suddenly shot to the top of interop-2025 this October https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025

ChadNauseam 11mo ago
I didn't realize it was tracked like this, but I have noticed that as of iOS 26, Safari has gotten a huge number of great web features. It has WebGPU of course, but many small things like fixing up missing parts of the OPFS API that make it actually usable now. Now they even have the field-sizing CSS property [0], fixing imo the most glaring ommission from CSS: the inability to make text input boxes grow to fit the input text! [0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Properties/field-sizing https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/P...
- rendaw 11mo ago
  I thought that was supposed to be fixed by contenteditable plaintext-only. Why was field sizing still necessary?
  - hombre_fatal 11mo ago
    At least recreate their demo for us to showcase the fix. But I feel like it would be a let down that answers your question.
  - extra88 11mo ago
    `contenteditable` is an HTML attribute but it depends on JavaScript to do anything useful. This problem is one of layout, CSS's domain, so `field-sizing` solves it while leaving HTML form elements to do the actual job of taking input.
neo_doom 11mo ago
Fascinating tracker. So we started 2025 with nearly every browser under 80% and ending the year with every browser with >98% interop? That's a lot of amazing work done by a lot of teams. Incredible!
- TheCoreh 11mo ago
  Just to clarify the meaning of the measurement, it doesn't mean they're 98% interoperable across everything, it's across the specific set of goals for 2025. (Which is still really good!) I think they realized that shipping the features out of sync meant nobody could use them until all browsers adopted them, which took years, so now they coordinate
  - lelandfe 11mo ago
    All of the above and even more so to have those features behave identically across the member browsers.
alwillis 11mo ago
> They surprised us all when they suddenly shot to the top of interop-2025 this October Not all of us were surprised; some of us have been watching the Safari team shipping the latest HTML and CSS features for a few years now.
al_borland 11mo ago
This seems like a bit of a trend with Safari. Around big releases Apple will announce how Safari is the best at X, but other times of the year it gets a lot of flack. I assume this is due to Safari’s more traditional release schedule vs other browsers continuously shipping feature updates.
- concinds 11mo ago
  Cool stuff they're working on tends to take a very long time to reach customers' hands compared to other browsers. Just compare the "stable" and "experimental" graphs on wpt.fyi for Safari. I can't think of a single good reason why they don't adopt an "evergreen" 4/6-week update model except Not Invented Here syndrome or "it's not Apple-like, we prefer the OS team (and therefore Marketing) dictating our release schedule, users be damned". It's an own-goal for no reason.
  - simondotau 11mo ago
    The web platform doesn’t need to move this fast. Google is, often unilaterally, pushing new features and declaring them standards. In my opinion, the web should not be changing so fast that a truly open source community project couldn’t keep up. I don’t like how the web has become reliant on the largesse of billion dollar corporations. I recognise that this is a controversial take, but in my opinion what Google is doing is a variant of “embrace and extend”. Traditionally, this meant proprietary extensions (e.g. VBScript) but I think this a subtle variant with similar consequences.
    - runlaszlorun 11mo ago
      VBScript is a word I hadn't heard in quite a while! Brings back memories of editing 5k line .asp files to find an if statement and then a 1000 lines of html and such. Sadly, I dont' think web development is actual better 20+ years later, just different...
    - concinds 11mo ago
      I know it's fashionable to forcefully shove the same pet peeves about Chromium into any topic even loosely related, but here I'm talking about Safari webcompat fixes, bug fixes, and improvements having very long delays between being written and landing in customers' hands. I would make the same argument if Chrome never existed. Thank you for presenting the 10,001st reissue of this "controversial take".
madeofpalk 11mo ago
This is not all that surprising. While the Chrome team is out there evangelising things like WebPCIe or whatever, Safari's been shipping features clients actually want, like blurred backgrounds for years before anyone else.
- cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
  Imagine if the literal army of Chromium/Blink engineers threw their entire weight into making the fundamental building blocks that everybody uses better instead of niche things that only a tiny fraction sites and web apps will ever need.
meowface 11mo ago
I hope they add WebTransport support soon.
- culi 11mo ago
  voting for interop 2026 is active now. I see somebody has already submitted a proposal for it https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/1121 https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/1121
MintPaw 11mo ago
Hm, I know that Safari doesn't support 64bit wasm, which is a very important feature that Chrome and Firefox both have, but this seems to say they have "100% webassembly support". https://webassembly.org/features/ https://webassembly.org/features/
- culi 11mo ago
  interop is a subset of tests chosen beforehand (nowadays, mostly by devs voting in the github issues). This says Safari has reached 100% on the subset of tests agreed upon for interop-25. Those specific tests can be expanded by clicking it in the menu. It'll take you here: https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm/jsapi?label=experimental&label=master&aligned&view=interop&q=label%3Ainterop-2025-webassembly https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm/jsapi?label=experimental&label=... The full test-suite of wasm tests are here: https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm
hoten 11mo ago
I wonder if Ladybird has explored running these interop tests yet. Or maybe these are just a subset of WPT?
- open592 11mo ago
  You can edit the "products" represented in the table and add "Ladybird" to the list. [1] Their result is: 1974740 / 2152733 (91%) They also have their own dashboards tracking this [2] [1] https://wpt.fyi/results/?product=ladybird https://wpt.fyi/results/?product=ladybird [2] https://grafana.app.ladybird.org/public-dashboards/2365098a185541cf8c7273830a789493?orgId=1&from=now-7d&to=now&timezone=browser https://grafana.app.ladybird.org/public-dashboards/2365098a1...
- nicoburns 11mo ago
  They are indeed just a subset of WPT. Although the way subtests are weighted in the score calcustion is slightly different for the "interop" score.
- culi 11mo ago
  Here's a comparison including the big 3, ladybird, servo, and flow https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&product=chrome&product=firefox&product=safari&product=ladybird&product=servo&product=flow&aligned https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&product=chrome&product... To answer your question, yes. Apple requires 80% test passage of all the tests on web-platforms-test in order to be considered as a valid browser for iOS so they specifically targeted this suite to reach that milestone It's a pretty silly requirement because wpt is not really meant to be representative of all web platform standards. It includes tests for non-standard features and the majority of tests are simple unicode glyph rendering tests.
  - nextaccountic 11mo ago
    I thought that no other browser engine could be provided on iOS. so no ladybird's engine, no servo, no gecko, no blink, only webkit
    - 11mo ago
65 11mo ago
Safari became the new IE for a while, the amount of problems I've had with Safari CSS animations and SVGs is endless. It's good they're trying to not make Safari suck as much.
- Unai 11mo ago
  Safari is still the new IE. Well, not really "new", it has been IE all along. It's the only non-evergreen browser that remains, and I don't get why this isn't mentioned every time Safari is brought up. All of their spec implementations are meaningless when the only version that matters is the one forever stuck in whichever oldest iPhone n% of people still use. Caniuse is pointless, their new "baseline" score is pointless; as long as enough people keep using their (perfectly fine and working) iPhones after official support stops and as long as they are not allowed to install a different browser (engine), that's the only data point you need to look at when choosing which browser features to use.
  - ksec 10mo ago
    iPhone or iOS has the highest upgrade percentage of OS. ~85%+ are on iOS 18 or higher. Liquid Glass iOS is the first time update has been slower. But Apple generally achieve near or over 80% of latest iOS by end of its cycle i.e coming August / September. One could argue Safari on iOS being like macOS where it could be updated standalone, but current rate isn't too bad.
- robertoandred 11mo ago
  The only people who think Safari is the new IE are people who weren’t around for IE.
  - alwillis 11mo ago
    > The only people who think Safari is the new IE are people who weren’t around for IE. Absolutely true! I've said the same thing many times myself. Stating that Safari is the new IE is one of the answers to: "Tell me you didn't do web development in '90s and have no idea what you're talking about without telling me you didn't do web development in '90s and have no idea what you're talking about."
pie_flavor 11mo ago
My favorite is finally supporting `arbitrary-subdomain.localhost`. Been a real pain in the neck to add Safari-specific fallbacks for my usage of that.
- jhogervorst 11mo ago
  Oh, that's nice for sure! Has it been announced anywhere?
zwnow 11mo ago
Does it still expand an svg to full size if u omit width and height attributes because u control the size in a parent container? Fuck safari
socalgal2 11mo ago
interop-2025. It does not mean Safari supports all the latest stuff. It means, "for some small subset of stuff here's the percent that's supported". Of course Safari pushes to have anything they don't want to support not in that subset.
ksec 10mo ago
Nice Chart. This along with Interop 2024 actually tacks well what I thought was major improvements. I first noticed it was Safari 18 and Safari 18.2, and then Safari 26 and now 26.2 where sites that dont used to work well are now all working. To the point for as long as Safari 26.2 has released I dont remember I had to switch to Chrome or Firefox to check. Where previously I do it at least monthly or quarterly. Hopefully they will make Safari smoother and faster with Multi Tabs in future release. There are lots of multi tab feature they could copy from Firefox.

by culi 11mo ago

Props to the Safari team. They surprised us all when they suddenly shot to the top of interop-2025 this October https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025 https://wpt.fyi/interop-2025

ChadNauseam 11mo ago

I didn't realize it was tracked like this, but I have noticed that as of iOS 26, Safari has gotten a huge number of great web features. It has WebGPU of course, but many small things like fixing up missing parts of the OPFS API that make it actually usable now. Now they even have the field-sizing CSS property [0], fixing imo the most glaring ommission from CSS: the inability to make text input boxes grow to fit the input text! [0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/Properties/field-sizing https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/P...

rendaw 11mo ago
I thought that was supposed to be fixed by contenteditable plaintext-only. Why was field sizing still necessary?
- hombre_fatal 11mo ago
  At least recreate their demo for us to showcase the fix. But I feel like it would be a let down that answers your question.
- extra88 11mo ago
  `contenteditable` is an HTML attribute but it depends on JavaScript to do anything useful. This problem is one of layout, CSS's domain, so `field-sizing` solves it while leaving HTML form elements to do the actual job of taking input.

neo_doom 11mo ago

Fascinating tracker. So we started 2025 with nearly every browser under 80% and ending the year with every browser with >98% interop? That's a lot of amazing work done by a lot of teams. Incredible!

TheCoreh 11mo ago
Just to clarify the meaning of the measurement, it doesn't mean they're 98% interoperable across everything, it's across the specific set of goals for 2025. (Which is still really good!) I think they realized that shipping the features out of sync meant nobody could use them until all browsers adopted them, which took years, so now they coordinate
- lelandfe 11mo ago
  All of the above and even more so to have those features behave identically across the member browsers.

alwillis 11mo ago

> They surprised us all when they suddenly shot to the top of interop-2025 this October Not all of us were surprised; some of us have been watching the Safari team shipping the latest HTML and CSS features for a few years now.

al_borland 11mo ago

This seems like a bit of a trend with Safari. Around big releases Apple will announce how Safari is the best at X, but other times of the year it gets a lot of flack. I assume this is due to Safari’s more traditional release schedule vs other browsers continuously shipping feature updates.

concinds 11mo ago
Cool stuff they're working on tends to take a very long time to reach customers' hands compared to other browsers. Just compare the "stable" and "experimental" graphs on wpt.fyi for Safari. I can't think of a single good reason why they don't adopt an "evergreen" 4/6-week update model except Not Invented Here syndrome or "it's not Apple-like, we prefer the OS team (and therefore Marketing) dictating our release schedule, users be damned". It's an own-goal for no reason.
- simondotau 11mo ago
  The web platform doesn’t need to move this fast. Google is, often unilaterally, pushing new features and declaring them standards. In my opinion, the web should not be changing so fast that a truly open source community project couldn’t keep up. I don’t like how the web has become reliant on the largesse of billion dollar corporations. I recognise that this is a controversial take, but in my opinion what Google is doing is a variant of “embrace and extend”. Traditionally, this meant proprietary extensions (e.g. VBScript) but I think this a subtle variant with similar consequences.
  - runlaszlorun 11mo ago
    VBScript is a word I hadn't heard in quite a while! Brings back memories of editing 5k line .asp files to find an if statement and then a 1000 lines of html and such. Sadly, I dont' think web development is actual better 20+ years later, just different...
  - concinds 11mo ago
    I know it's fashionable to forcefully shove the same pet peeves about Chromium into any topic even loosely related, but here I'm talking about Safari webcompat fixes, bug fixes, and improvements having very long delays between being written and landing in customers' hands. I would make the same argument if Chrome never existed. Thank you for presenting the 10,001st reissue of this "controversial take".

madeofpalk 11mo ago

This is not all that surprising. While the Chrome team is out there evangelising things like WebPCIe or whatever, Safari's been shipping features clients actually want, like blurred backgrounds for years before anyone else.

cosmic_cheese 11mo ago
Imagine if the literal army of Chromium/Blink engineers threw their entire weight into making the fundamental building blocks that everybody uses better instead of niche things that only a tiny fraction sites and web apps will ever need.

meowface 11mo ago

I hope they add WebTransport support soon.

culi 11mo ago
voting for interop 2026 is active now. I see somebody has already submitted a proposal for it https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/1121 https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/1121

MintPaw 11mo ago

Hm, I know that Safari doesn't support 64bit wasm, which is a very important feature that Chrome and Firefox both have, but this seems to say they have "100% webassembly support". https://webassembly.org/features/ https://webassembly.org/features/

culi 11mo ago
interop is a subset of tests chosen beforehand (nowadays, mostly by devs voting in the github issues). This says Safari has reached 100% on the subset of tests agreed upon for interop-25. Those specific tests can be expanded by clicking it in the menu. It'll take you here: https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm/jsapi?label=experimental&label=master&aligned&view=interop&q=label%3Ainterop-2025-webassembly https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm/jsapi?label=experimental&label=... The full test-suite of wasm tests are here: https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm https://wpt.fyi/results/wasm

hoten 11mo ago

I wonder if Ladybird has explored running these interop tests yet. Or maybe these are just a subset of WPT?

open592 11mo ago
You can edit the "products" represented in the table and add "Ladybird" to the list. [1] Their result is: 1974740 / 2152733 (91%) They also have their own dashboards tracking this [2] [1] https://wpt.fyi/results/?product=ladybird https://wpt.fyi/results/?product=ladybird [2] https://grafana.app.ladybird.org/public-dashboards/2365098a185541cf8c7273830a789493?orgId=1&from=now-7d&to=now&timezone=browser https://grafana.app.ladybird.org/public-dashboards/2365098a1...
nicoburns 11mo ago
They are indeed just a subset of WPT. Although the way subtests are weighted in the score calcustion is slightly different for the "interop" score.
culi 11mo ago
Here's a comparison including the big 3, ladybird, servo, and flow https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&product=chrome&product=firefox&product=safari&product=ladybird&product=servo&product=flow&aligned https://wpt.fyi/results/?label=master&product=chrome&product... To answer your question, yes. Apple requires 80% test passage of all the tests on web-platforms-test in order to be considered as a valid browser for iOS so they specifically targeted this suite to reach that milestone It's a pretty silly requirement because wpt is not really meant to be representative of all web platform standards. It includes tests for non-standard features and the majority of tests are simple unicode glyph rendering tests.
- nextaccountic 11mo ago
  I thought that no other browser engine could be provided on iOS. so no ladybird's engine, no servo, no gecko, no blink, only webkit
  - 11mo ago

65 11mo ago

Safari became the new IE for a while, the amount of problems I've had with Safari CSS animations and SVGs is endless. It's good they're trying to not make Safari suck as much.

Unai 11mo ago
Safari is still the new IE. Well, not really "new", it has been IE all along. It's the only non-evergreen browser that remains, and I don't get why this isn't mentioned every time Safari is brought up. All of their spec implementations are meaningless when the only version that matters is the one forever stuck in whichever oldest iPhone n% of people still use. Caniuse is pointless, their new "baseline" score is pointless; as long as enough people keep using their (perfectly fine and working) iPhones after official support stops and as long as they are not allowed to install a different browser (engine), that's the only data point you need to look at when choosing which browser features to use.
- ksec 10mo ago
  iPhone or iOS has the highest upgrade percentage of OS. ~85%+ are on iOS 18 or higher. Liquid Glass iOS is the first time update has been slower. But Apple generally achieve near or over 80% of latest iOS by end of its cycle i.e coming August / September. One could argue Safari on iOS being like macOS where it could be updated standalone, but current rate isn't too bad.
robertoandred 11mo ago
The only people who think Safari is the new IE are people who weren’t around for IE.
- alwillis 11mo ago
  > The only people who think Safari is the new IE are people who weren’t around for IE. Absolutely true! I've said the same thing many times myself. Stating that Safari is the new IE is one of the answers to: "Tell me you didn't do web development in '90s and have no idea what you're talking about without telling me you didn't do web development in '90s and have no idea what you're talking about."

pie_flavor 11mo ago

My favorite is finally supporting `arbitrary-subdomain.localhost`. Been a real pain in the neck to add Safari-specific fallbacks for my usage of that.

jhogervorst 11mo ago
Oh, that's nice for sure! Has it been announced anywhere?

zwnow 11mo ago

Does it still expand an svg to full size if u omit width and height attributes because u control the size in a parent container? Fuck safari

socalgal2 11mo ago

interop-2025. It does not mean Safari supports all the latest stuff. It means, "for some small subset of stuff here's the percent that's supported". Of course Safari pushes to have anything they don't want to support not in that subset.

ksec 10mo ago

Nice Chart. This along with Interop 2024 actually tacks well what I thought was major improvements. I first noticed it was Safari 18 and Safari 18.2, and then Safari 26 and now 26.2 where sites that dont used to work well are now all working. To the point for as long as Safari 26.2 has released I dont remember I had to switch to Chrome or Firefox to check. Where previously I do it at least monthly or quarterly. Hopefully they will make Safari smoother and faster with Multi Tabs in future release. There are lots of multi tab feature they could copy from Firefox.