4 ms·

> Instead, we should focus on the web’s strengths: simplicity, URLs and reach. How does new browser feature X prevent a developer from doing any of these thin

> Instead, we should focus on the web’s strengths: simplicity, URLs and reach. How does new browser feature X prevent a developer from doing any of these things? > Being forced to work around IE6’s issues required quite a bit of creativity, and although not every solution stood the test of time (most libraries and frameworks from that era, for instance), it still made the creative juices flow. 'Tools' are bad except when they are used to work around stagnant browsers, I guess?

adrusi 11y ago
Both of your points are right, but I'd like to point out that regarding: How does new browser feature X prevent a developer from doing any of these things? A moratorium on new features probably wouldn't help, but the reality is that web developers are focusing on new shiny browser features that allow for deeper native integration, rather than on the core elements of the web that work and carry greater usability gains, like offline support.
- jscottmiller 11y ago
  That's a good point. I can see a progression like: developer finds new feature X that solves problem Y, developer finds that feature X is only supported by 20% of customer browsers, developer adds polyfill in XXX kB, buggy javascript library with other performance-related side-effects. Maybe the issue is just educating web developers about what's available, and the non-obvious side-effects using feature X. Here's what I'd like to see: organize a site like caniuse not by feature, but by tiers of support in the entire population of installed browsers. Something like: Supported by 99.99% of user-agents: image tags, ... Supported by 95% of user-agents: XHR, ... (I'm making those numbers up).
romaniv 11y ago
For example, a lot of the problems that could be easily solved via declarative HTML tags are being solved via low-level JavaScript APIs. Not to mention that the web sets its own expectations. If everyone uses stupid modal popups, your clients will expect you to use stupid modal popups.

adrusi 11y ago

Both of your points are right, but I'd like to point out that regarding: How does new browser feature X prevent a developer from doing any of these things? A moratorium on new features probably wouldn't help, but the reality is that web developers are focusing on new shiny browser features that allow for deeper native integration, rather than on the core elements of the web that work and carry greater usability gains, like offline support.

jscottmiller 11y ago
That's a good point. I can see a progression like: developer finds new feature X that solves problem Y, developer finds that feature X is only supported by 20% of customer browsers, developer adds polyfill in XXX kB, buggy javascript library with other performance-related side-effects. Maybe the issue is just educating web developers about what's available, and the non-obvious side-effects using feature X. Here's what I'd like to see: organize a site like caniuse not by feature, but by tiers of support in the entire population of installed browsers. Something like: Supported by 99.99% of user-agents: image tags, ... Supported by 95% of user-agents: XHR, ... (I'm making those numbers up).

romaniv 11y ago

For example, a lot of the problems that could be easily solved via declarative HTML tags are being solved via low-level JavaScript APIs. Not to mention that the web sets its own expectations. If everyone uses stupid modal popups, your clients will expect you to use stupid modal popups.