Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#2Short-sighted. Chrome's original performance push didn't come at the expense of web platform features and that's part of why it was able to supplant existing browsers.
Any claims that this will improve performance in the long-term are misguided: These kinds of layout features are necessary, so stripping them from the core (especially when other browsers are implementing them) will result in a nasty mix of browser-specific pages and low-performance javascript shims.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#3Ah yes, the Open Web, brought to you by MS, Google, Apple, Mozilla, and Op^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H. Remember, if there's anything you don't like about their decisions, you can change things just by starting your own web brower and getting your first hundred million users.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#4This should be handled by the web-standards committee. Yes it's slow-moving, but solutions that only work in one browser will balkanize the web.
If I were Adobe I'd try to build a javascript-based solution for now, and push on the standards committees for the long term.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#5Ah yes, the Open Web, brought to you by MS, Google, Apple, Mozilla, and Op^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H. Remember, if there's anything you don't like about their decisions, you can change things just by starting your own web brower and getting your first hundred million users.
I hate to agree with this troll, but I don't see how to disagree :(
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#6I highly recommend reading the original thread instead of this horrible writeup: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...
Especially Håkon Wium Lie, who isn't even mentioned in this article, brings up some really convincing points against CSS Regions.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#7Short-sighted. Chrome's original performance push didn't come at the expense of web platform features and that's part of why it was able to supplant existing browsers. Any claims that this will improve performance in the long-term are misguided: These kinds of layout features are necessary, so stripping them from the core (especially when other browsers are implementing them) will result in a nasty mix of browser-spe…
You can get the same effect without java-script using Wrap and cutting an image into multiple sections. So, while useful long term there is little immediate need to add this feature if it's causing some issues.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#8Ah yes, the Open Web, brought to you by MS, Google, Apple, Mozilla, and Op^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H. Remember, if there's anything you don't like about their decisions, you can change things just by starting your own web brower and getting your first hundred million users.
Troll is wrong. Engineers don't make things that are dependent on closed standards (stares at different frameworks especially cocoa touch framework). We don't need a new Flash!
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#9Dear Google, other things you might want to do to make your rendering engine faster, especially on mobile.
* Proxy all mobile connections through an html-simplifier
* Ignore inline elements like and * Remove the vertical part of the box model, and disallow any vertical positioning statements * Simply serve raw html to the end user. In these days of semantic HTML5, users should be able to read it anyway.
Re: Reversing course, Google rejects Adobe Web publishing tech
#10I would say the reason is Google Docs! The current version doesn't use contentEditable [0] anymore, Google wrote a custom renderer in JS using one DIV per line with custom word wrapping, etc.
With Adobe's CSS Regions and other improvements [1] everyone could write an Google Docs competitor (single person mode) in one hour. Of course, Google and Microsoft with its Office Web fear this possible upcoming situation.
It would be awesome if some browser devs improve "contentEditable". It's really sad, there are so many bugs in Webkit and Firefox bugtrackers and got submitted related to this topic and no one fixed them. And no new features arrive either for years. Read some source code TinyMCE & co and you know what I mean, a lot of hacks to work around browser bugs.