I never knew how much I wanted a tag to put on websites until now... and I'm super disappointed this blog was a ruse.
Introducing a new HTML element – welcome
131–140 of 234 posts
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
What aspect of the Firefox UI bothers you?
Not the OP, but I'll chip in with my $.02. I really want to like Firefox, but everything UI feels wrong (on macOS). From tabs, where the close button is on the wrong side (right) and if you click the + button to open a new tab the cursor ends up over the new tab, not over the + button so you can click again to open a new tab. The whole UI looks and feels non-native. Pressing ESC in full screen mode does not bring the…
> No automatic keychain integration for login forms.
Chrome also stopped doing this, AFAIK.
Fun fact: I was subscribed to a firefox ticket "Password manager should support OS X Keychain" which is 18 years old, it got closed some months ago. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106400
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why not just call it ? In Android land, a "toast" is a particular implementation of a notification. https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/ui/notifiers/toas...
So if nothing else it's shockingly bad semantics. If Android called them Turds, would that be any better or worse semantically?
Call it what it is: a pop-up. You know, the thing we've spent years trying to block on the web because it's an anti-pattern that malicious actors abuse to steal clicks and make interaction harder.
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has rewritten its entire rendering engine, and its entire CSS engine. Writing a browser is incredibly hard, but not infeasible.
While writing rendering engine isn't easy to do, it's extremely easy compared to the HTML part. Even Mozilla isn't in a hurry to rewrite all that code.
HTML parsing is not that hard compared to CSS/layout/fonts (or even figuring out layout), a competitive JavaScript engine, and the myriad of APIs and site compatibility problems OP talked about.
My HTML parser uses SGML which is more generic as it takes the HTML grammar (a DTD) as parameter and computes state machine tables etc. dynamically based on it, thus a bit harder, but still very much doable.
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why not just call it ? In Android land, a "toast" is a particular implementation of a notification. https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/ui/notifiers/toas...
So if nothing else it's shockingly bad semantics. If Android called them Turds, would that be any better or worse semantically?
I imagine that would be a notification that slowly drops down, then clips off and falls below the bottom of the screen
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been repeating the Chrome is the new IE meme for the last few years. I even had a boss that only cared about our code working on Chrome and would lose it when I was demoing / developing from FireFox. I only ever demoed in Chrome just to feed that illusion that I was adhering to Chrome but I honestly dont see anything special or better and I still made sure it behaved and worked the same in both. I know people…
> Chrome is the new IE Some software houses who supply the company I work for, are refusing to work with anything but Chrome. So it really does seem like the bad old days all over again.
It is nothing remotely like the bad old days. I'm assuming you never had to support IE6.
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#137Unlike the author, I do not think is a good idea. Elements are supposed to express semantics, but this just suggests behaviour. Not very descriptive behaviour either - since when does actual real-life toast smoothly rise and fall again? Possibly from the ceiling or coming in from the side? Why not just call it ? Or even better, don’t add anything - it’s surely just a that needs styling and animating with existing CSS…
> since when does actual real-life toast smoothly rise and fall again? Perhaps the inspiration came from the Sunbeam Radiant Control toaster: https://youtu.be/1OfxlSG6q5Y Unlike modern toasters which rudely attempt to catapult your toast into orbit, the Sunbeam gracefully and almost silently presents your toast with the love and care it deserves.
More importantly, the slider on it doesn't control time but rather doneness. It gages the reflectivity of the surface to determine how brown the item has become, meaning my frozen Eggo and my refrigerated sliced bread both come out how I want them without having to play with the dial each time.
But my, does it feel more fragile than my old Chinesium toaster!
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Chrome is the new IE Some software houses who supply the company I work for, are refusing to work with anything but Chrome. So it really does seem like the bad old days all over again.
It is nothing remotely like the bad old days. I'm assuming you never had to support IE6.
IE6 was good until it wasn't anymore.
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#139With some UIs on the modern web, I’d love for clippy to appear and tell me what to do
"You seem to be having some trouble. The text over here is clickable, but the text right next to it, which looks basically the same isn't. Simple, right? I love 'buttons'!" "You seem to be having some trouble. I find clicking on everything randomly until you figure out what each piece of the web-page does works best for me!" "You seem to be having some trouble - have you tried using this website on a phone?"
Surely the last one should be:
"You don't seem to be having _enough_ trouble - have you tried using this website on a phone?"
Re: Introducing a new HTML element – welcome <clippy>
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is nothing remotely like the bad old days. I'm assuming you never had to support IE6.
IE6 was good until it wasn't anymore.
No, IE6 was far less terrible than IE4, but still amazingly awful. If was from the era of browsers where you had to essentially code up different copies of a page per-browser if you wanted any sort of graphical anything.