4 ms·
The definition of a web browser is enormous now. Even though Apple has massive resources, is it really fair to rant against them for not implementing every pos
by bickfordb 11y ago
The definition of a web browser is enormous now. Even though Apple has massive resources, is it really fair to rant against them for not implementing every possible specification, five years old or not?
If web assembly is supposedly as fast as C, why can't we have web browsers with a smaller built-in feature set and implement new specifications as libraries?
- realityking 11y agoWhile web assembly may give us performance, it doesn't give us access to new platform API. Web assembly can in no way replace Service Worker, IndexedDB or Web Manifests. It also won't help with Web Components unless you're aming for a Web where we just draw on a big canvas.
- verbin217 11y agoI want a web where we just draw on a big canvas. That's a pretty simple API for implementers to get right. Then we could move the scene graph (DOM) and it's rendering engine entirely into the application language where it could be more readily hot-fixed. It'd be like PDFJS but for your whole fucking web browser.
- notduncansmith 11y agoHave you looked into the Famo.us project? It's not my cup of tea in terms of implementation, but it sounds like exactly what you're looking for. Alternatively, what's keeping you from just using <canvas>?
- bzbarsky 11y agoNote that PDFJS still creates a DOM, in order to support little things like selection, accessibility, etc.
- ripter 11y agoThat was the idea behind ActiveX. Instead of continuing development on the browser, people could just write an ActiveX component. Or A Java Applet.