Chrome breaks the Web
tonsky.me
Chrome breaks the Web
1–10 of 473 posts
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#2> Google wasn’t concerned about your websites at all. It was more concerned about its own product performance
Why I'm not surprised?
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#3There’s a good point here but the clickbait trappings are holding it back, especially since passive listeners aren’t some obscure edge case which only Google needs.
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#4I side with Google on this one. IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#5I side with Google on this one. IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
Except that Firefox LTS and other minority browsers suffer. I already use a couple sites that disregard all old Firefox compatibilities and use JS that break things up
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#6I side with Google on this one. IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
Maybe, but the really heinous decision is digitally altering how websites get delivered to the user to make your own product look better. Even if the newer listener form had been around for several years, it would be unacceptable to essentially try to decree a new design pattern by taking websites hostage for browser performance reasons.
Consider that, to the user, these are all seen as website problems. Breaking Javascript with consensus is great - breaking designs without blame is a slap in the face to web developers.
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#7I side with Google on this one. IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
Except that Firefox LTS and other minority browsers suffer. I already use a couple sites that disregard all old Firefox compatibilities and use JS that break things up
How does this affect Firefox LTS? It doesn’t.
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#8I side with Google on this one. IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
> IMO we should be breaking JavaScript more often, especially in the name of performance, to make people use less JS and simpler JS on their websites.
Though not by pushing it down people's throats in a backwards-incompatible way.
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#9> they made all top-level event listeners passive by default. They call it “an intervention”.
This is my very problem with Chrome/Chromium right now. The Chrome team does assumption on how things "should" be (in a highly subjective way) and breaks the web.
Another example: they decided to ignore the value of `autocomplete` attributes on `` tags [1], because:
> The tricky part here is that somewhere along the journey of the web autocomplete=off become a default for many form fields, without any real thought being given as to whether or not that was good for users. This doesn't mean there aren't very valid cases where you don't want the browser autofilling data (e.g. on CRM systems), but by and large, we see those as the minority cases. And as a result, we started ignoring autocomplete=off for Chrome Autofill data.
Problem: Chrome now auto-fills wrong parts of forms with username/passwords and this breaks forms that get unexpected data when submitted. And now, they opened an issue on their tracker [2] to track "Valid use cases for autocomplete=off".
This is insane to think that the developer is wrong to use some attributes values, and to assume how a page should behave, ignoring devs intentions and Web standards.
[1] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=468153...
[2] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=587466
Re: Chrome breaks the Web
#10> Turned out, Google wasn’t concerned about your websites at all. It was more concerned about its own product performance, Google Chrome Mobile.
As a web developer, I see this attitude a lot and it annoys me immensely. Another way of phrasing it: Google is putting users first, ahead of developers. This is as it should be. "your" website exists to serve users, if you're doing a bad job at it then maybe it's an opportunity for self reflection.
Janky scrolling behaviour on mobile has been a problem for a long time. Apple also implemented non-standard behaviour for years to avoid it. You should almost never be listening to scroll events in a non-passive way. The vast majority of times scroll listening is used, a passive listener is the correct implementation and just wasn't available when the code was written.
This is proven by the article itself: the change was made in February of this year. Do you remember the internet breaking that day, and all of us rushing to update our event listeners? No, me neither. Did Chrome really break when the web when absolutely nothing broke?