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

libexpat now funded by the City of Munich for up to 6 months

blog.hartwork.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 81 posts

Re: libexpat now funded by the City of Munich for up to 6 months

#11

Post by neuronexmachina »

righthand wrote: post #4

Hey maybe the haters at Google /WHATWG can use this library instead of killing off XSLT. Just kidding we all know they’re too compromised by monopoly/advertising interests of Google and their own beliefs to allow such a cool technology to live on; and don’t have the skills for such a thing.

Chrome uses libexpat for XML parsing, not XSLT.

Re: libexpat now funded by the City of Munich for up to 6 months

#13

Post by righthand »

neuronexmachina wrote: post #11
righthand wrote: post #4

Hey maybe the haters at Google /WHATWG can use this library instead of killing off XSLT. Just kidding we all know they’re too compromised by monopoly/advertising interests of Google and their own beliefs to allow such a cool technology to live on; and don’t have the skills for such a thing.

Chrome uses libexpat for XML parsing, not XSLT.

I believe Chrome uses libxml2 (though perhaps they use libexpat too) and the WHATWG has claimed that XSLT should not exist as a part of the HTML spec (it should and does), so the WHATWG Google members can force Javascript rendering on everyone and secure their advertising monopoly (which is loaded through js). Their claim is that libxml2 is too security riddled and they can’t contribute any work to it even though they have plenty of people and money to help fix it and they just wrote a post claiming that LLMs has helped reduce the amount of bugs in Chrome. The jerks even used LLMs to generate an untested polyfill in Javascript so that they can reduce the absolutely stellar performance of XML rendering to slow Javascript. They also used the untested pollyfill as a reason to remove it.

These are people who supposedly like the diverse web and performant technologies.

Re: libexpat now funded by the City of Munich for up to 6 months

#15

Post by mindwok »

google234123 wrote: post #14
neuronexmachina wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cities shouldn't fund the software they rely on?

Cities need a lot of things - should they fund everything?

Whether they should or shouldn't is a worthy question that they have no influence over. Taking the initiative and supporting the software they rely on is a good step in the meantime while we argue on HN about whether it's optimal or not.
Post reply on HN