Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 272 posts

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#51

Post by pizlonator »

jerf wrote: post #45

Thank you for the belly-laugh. It's Goodhart's Law in graph form. "Oh, is this metric important ? Let me get right on that." No shade intended towards the Ladybird team. You were given the terms and you're behaving rationally in response to them. More power to you. It's just a fantastic demonstration of what it looks like to very suddenly be developing against a very specific metric.

I think that this metric correlates well with the browser being usable on real websites

Also, I don't think that the Ladybird folks are just doing the bare minimum to only increase their score on WPT. They're implementing each feature in such a way that basic browsing seems to work better and that their WPT score improves.

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#52

Post by fragmede »

jerf wrote: post #45

Thank you for the belly-laugh. It's Goodhart's Law in graph form. "Oh, is this metric important ? Let me get right on that." No shade intended towards the Ladybird team. You were given the terms and you're behaving rationally in response to them. More power to you. It's just a fantastic demonstration of what it looks like to very suddenly be developing against a very specific metric.

I mean, sure, but can you point to any work that you think they should be doing that they're not doing because they're chasing this benchmark instead of doing whatever it is you think they should be doing?

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#53

Post by fabrice_d »

tracker1 wrote: post #8
pizlonator wrote: post #6

Super impressive that an independent, non-corpo project has gotten this far this quickly.

Definitely... IF they keep this up, they will be a real contender by the end of 2027. I keep saying I'd like to see a similar push for Servo though... since it's probably the next most feature-rich engine option. It really needs a corresponding browser project to go along side it though, since FF/Mozilla isn't that interested.

It looks like Amazon has people looking at Servo integration in GTK: https://blogs.gnome.org/nacho/2025/10/01/servo-gtk/

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#54

Post by nonethewiser »

nicce wrote: post #14
pizlonator wrote: post #6

Super impressive that an independent, non-corpo project has gotten this far this quickly.

But how to pass tests securely, is completely different problem. This is conformance testing. But impressive regardless.

Can you elaborate? What do you mean by how to pass tests securely? It doesn't read like you mean security tests but otherwise I have no idea what you're talking about.

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#55

Post by fabrice_d »

pizlonator wrote: post #51
jerf wrote: post #45

Thank you for the belly-laugh. It's Goodhart's Law in graph form. "Oh, is this metric important ? Let me get right on that." No shade intended towards the Ladybird team. You were given the terms and you're behaving rationally in response to them. More power to you. It's just a fantastic demonstration of what it looks like to very suddenly be developing against a very specific metric.

I think that this metric correlates well with the browser being usable on real websites Also, I don't think that the Ladybird folks are just doing the bare minimum to only increase their score on WPT. They're implementing each feature in such a way that basic browsing seems to work better and that their WPT score improves.

The wpt score is not that well balanced. Look at https://staging.wpt.fyi/results/?product=servo&product=ladyb... : out of about 2 million tests, more than half are for the "encoding" category. Good encoding support is needed for sure, but likely not at that level of prevalence.

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#56

Post by ericmcer »

pizlonator wrote: post #6

Super impressive that an independent, non-corpo project has gotten this far this quickly.

It is nuts, when you think about how much a browser does, it is a crazy feat.

Just building a good html/css renderer and a JS engine is crazy, but now you are hooked into the ecosystem and at the mercy of whatever comes next. Chrome can push back against proposals but little browsers either use chromium or are basically in a riptide trying to make sure they keep up.

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#59

Post by evilduck »

mmis1000 wrote: post #46
dylan604 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's okay for a website builder to test in only one browser defaulting to an imposed browser/agent restriction?

The point is they are not even compliment to their "own" spec. They are part of whatwg. But if you ever write web page. You will know it's always the safari that differs from the spec. Firefox in the other end never have such issue. Write a page on chrome, works 90% on Firefox. But will likely works 10% on safari. Supports safari literally means support another browser (by workaround all its bugs).

Those are some exaggerated beyond belief numbers you just made up. Some of us also work in web development and know better.

Re: Ladybird passes the Apple 90% threshold on web-platform-tests

#60

Post by mrguyorama »

dylan604 wrote: post #34
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What quality control? Are we talking about the same App Store where copyright infringement is blatantly on display? What a joke. I guess it doesn’t matter if its customers are equally as clueless.

Where does quality control to spec compliance come into play on copyright issues? Is part of the spec compliance to be free of copyright infringement? /s Of course this is the infuriating type of response I'd expect to receive

A reminder that Apple's "quality control" approved this:

https://blog.lastpass.com/posts/warning-fraudulent-app-imper...

Post reply on HN