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

CSS Grid Lanes

webkit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 237 posts

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#21

Post by mikae1 »

throwaway613745 wrote: post #19
valleyer wrote: post #4

Is this increasing complexity in the Web layout world worth it? Anyone who wants to use this is going to drop support for older browsers (and, in so doing, older machines that can't run newer OSes and newer browsers). Personally, I use an 11-year-old machine and have had to add userscript hacks to certain major Web sites to work around bugs in CSS grid (not the "lanes" described here). At least new JavaScript feature…

I am using a machine older than eleven years old and can still run the newest version of Firefox and Chrome. I don't think the world needs to cater to people that refuse even basic internet hygiene.

I routinely use an 11 year old computer too. I can not see why "userscript hacks" would be needed.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#22

Post by afavour »

valleyer wrote: post #4

Is this increasing complexity in the Web layout world worth it? Anyone who wants to use this is going to drop support for older browsers (and, in so doing, older machines that can't run newer OSes and newer browsers). Personally, I use an 11-year-old machine and have had to add userscript hacks to certain major Web sites to work around bugs in CSS grid (not the "lanes" described here). At least new JavaScript feature…

> Is this increasing complexity in the Web layout world worth it?

Yes. I held off learning about CSS Grid for a very long time and as soon as I did I was converted. Sometimes I think the web doesn’t get enough credit for its ambition: mobile viewports, desktop viewports, touch interaction, pointer interaction, complex documents, webapps… it’s a lot. But you get some complexity as a side effect. The complexity we do see these days isn’t invented out of whole cloth, it’s standardising and improving layouts people are implementing with JavaScript, often badly.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#23

Post by runarberg »

anonymous908213 wrote: post #14
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If enough consumers aren't able to use the website, then business wouldn't use it. The reality is new computers aren't that expensive (I see used M1s for under 1k) and consumers are upgrading.

You mentioned a used model that is over 5 years old as an example of "a new computer", and "1k" as "not expensive for consumers". It is honestly impressive how well you undermined your own point. > If enough consumers aren't able to use the website, then business wouldn't use it. I sincerely doubt any business owner would approve of losing even 10% of their potential users/customers if they knew that was the trade-of…

Most web devs get screemed at (by their peer reviewers or [preferably] static analysis tools) if they use a feature which has less then like 98% support without gracefully denigrating it, and rightfully so.

But your GP is in a massive minority, if every developer would cater to 11 year old browsers we would be wasting a lot of developer time to inferior designs, with more hacks which brake the web for even more users.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#24

Post by idle_zealot »

hackyhacky wrote: post #9
jimvdv wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not updating your browser will net you tons of exploitable vulnerabilities. How do you expect things to ever change if no one ever updates? Certainly even if you decide to lean towards maximum support it’s still a positive these features are being introduced so you can use them in 10 years.

> How do you expect things to ever change if no one ever updates? Maybe things should stop changing. We don't really need ten new CSS attributes every year. Things work. The elegant solution is to announce the project is done. That would bring some much-needed stability. Then we can focus on keeping things working.

The issue with this is that the browser is the cross-playing operating system, the VM that runs webapps. But we treat the platform like an evolving document format. If we want to declare it complete, we need to make it extensible so we can have a stable core without freezing capabilities. I foresee all of this CSS/HTML stuff as eventually being declared a sort of legacy format and adding a standard way to ship pluggable rendering engines/language runtimes. WASM is one step in that direction. There are custom rendering/layout engines now, but they basically have to render to canvas and lose a lot of performance and platform integration. Proper official support for such engines with hooks into accessibility features and the like could close that gap. Of course, then you have every website shipping a while OS userland for every pageload, kinda like containers on servers, but that overhead could probably be mitigated with some caching of tagged dependencies. Then you have unscrupulous types who might use load timings to detect cache state for user profiling... I'm sure there's a better solution for that than just disabling cross-site caching...

I digress.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#25

Post by brcmthrowaway »

I don't understand all the busywork goes behind new browser updates, just to retain their market share (since they can afford more engineers, than say Ladybird). Is this needed? It's not rocket science, folks.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#26

Post by crazygringo »

valleyer wrote: post #4

Is this increasing complexity in the Web layout world worth it? Anyone who wants to use this is going to drop support for older browsers (and, in so doing, older machines that can't run newer OSes and newer browsers). Personally, I use an 11-year-old machine and have had to add userscript hacks to certain major Web sites to work around bugs in CSS grid (not the "lanes" described here). At least new JavaScript feature…

> I use an 11-year-old machine

What OS are you running that can't run modern versions of browsers, and on what hardware?

Current Chrome runs on Windows 10, which came out 9.5 years ago but was intended to run on older computers, and macOS Monterey, which runs on Macs from ~2014-2015 depending on the model. But even Big Sur before that, the most recent version of Chrome which runs on that is Chrome 138 from just 6 months ago, and that doesn't seem old enough that you need to build userscript hacks.

I'm really curious what you're actually running. Generally speaking, an 11-year-old desktop should be able to run the current browser, and if not, a very recent one.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#28

Post by anonymous908213 »

runarberg wrote: post #23
anonymous908213 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mentioned a used model that is over 5 years old as an example of "a new computer", and "1k" as "not expensive for consumers". It is honestly impressive how well you undermined your own point. > If enough consumers aren't able to use the website, then business wouldn't use it. I sincerely doubt any business owner would approve of losing even 10% of their potential users/customers if they knew that was the trade-of…

Most web devs get screemed at (by their peer reviewers or [preferably] static analysis tools) if they use a feature which has less then like 98% support without gracefully denigrating it, and rightfully so. But your GP is in a massive minority, if every developer would cater to 11 year old browsers we would be wasting a lot of developer time to inferior designs, with more hacks which brake the web for even more users…

I don't know about "most". For various reasons, I use a 2-year-old browser on a daily basis (alongside an up-to-date browser), and I routinely run into websites that are completely broken on the 2-year-old browser. Unrelated to outdatedness, I recently ran into a local government website that e-mailed me my password in plaintext upon account creation. I have no way of accurately quantifying whether "most" web developers fall into the competent or incompetent bucket, but regardless of which there are more of, there are a significant enough number of incompetent ones.

Re: CSS Grid Lanes

#29

Post by culi »

miiiiiike wrote: post #11
ThatMedicIsASpy wrote: post #6

I've run the masonry layout (for my personal bookmark website) ever since I've found it in the browser settings. grid-template-rows: masonry; is going to be outdated then?

Yeah, there was a years long debate that effectively ended with: “We held a vote that you weren’t aware of and decided that masonry was out. If you cared, you should have participated in the vote that you were not aware was happening. It’s too late to change it.” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yikbSQ6tvlE

Wasn't Firefox the only browser that actually implemented `grid-template-rows: masonry` anyways?

It sucks whenever browsers backtrack on a W3C standard that reached "Working Draft" status but it doesn't seem like it's gonna impact many people

Besides, it's not being "deprecated". It will continue to work as it does. We just have a better alternative that the big 3 all agreed on.

Post reply on HN