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

The Open Web Needs You Now

glazman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#31

Post by el_presidente »

spooneybarger wrote: post #23
methodin wrote: post #22

What's the reason they even have to add a prefix? If all we end up doing is prefix the feature with 4 different ones, and then the actual feature name in case all else fail, it's pretty pointless. The browser should just implement the feature as it is spec'd and when it's finalized they can do the work to match the specs again. If we did that then nothing would break other than possibly some behavioral differences.

So browser makes can push forward innovation by adding support for experimental procedures.

Something that is available on hundreds of millions of phones is not experimental.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#32

Post by SquareWheel »

erichocean wrote: post #10

> I am also calling Apple and Google to remove support for the "experimental" versions of a property when the final one is implemented and shipped. That is a terrible, terrible idea and will never (and should never) happen. Sure, add support for the un-prefixed property. But don't break existing sites. That mentality is what gave us XHTML, and we all know how that went. I guess it is the IE6 days all over again after…

Out of curiosity, what's wrong with XHTML? It forces people to write cleaner code as far as I'm concerned. I find HTML far too lenient.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#33

Post by gerggerg »

I think the doom and gloom is a bit over-hyped, and the other browser authors probably have no choice but to implement the webkit prefixes. They just don't have the install numbers to do otherwise. I don't like the situation but I see it as inevitable and not that big of a deal.

The only way for this to change, is to build into the spec that once a feature is no longer experimental its vendor specific tag name gets deprecated and then removed and the deprecation warning needs to show up in the web inspector / firebug. Otherwise devs will literally think if it ain't broke don't fix it.

This is a job for the W3C. They have the task now of convincing browser manufacturers to implement this and to really start picking up the pace standardizing the web. There is never going to be enough public outcry to get people to stop using the webkit only prefixes unless other browser install numbers pick up.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#34

Post by dmethvin »

el_presidente wrote: post #31
spooneybarger wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So browser makes can push forward innovation by adding support for experimental procedures.

Something that is available on hundreds of millions of phones is not experimental.

Exactly the problem. There was a proposal to make vendor-prefixed features only available on experimental builds, but as long as they escape to the wild and do cool things developers will use them

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#35

Post by _urga »

samth wrote: post #30
_urga wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that's too slow.

6 weeks is exactly the same update cycle as Chrome, and much faster than Safari (or Mobile Safari, or the Android Browser).

You're right. 6 week release cycles for Firefox are as of April 2011, Chrome has been at it for longer. There are problems with the release cycle for Firefox, it's not as seamless, and the numbers are not as good: http://royal.pingdom.com/2011/12/06/comparing-chrome-and-fir...

In terms of what is delivered in each update, Chrome is ahead. For instance, IndexedDB in Firefox at one stage was an order of magnitude slower than Chrome for several months and this may still be the case, Mozilla's implementation being based on SQLite, with Chrome on LevelDB. There is the dubious history of WebSQL, and the FileSystem API. Many of the new useful CSS features have taken far longer in Firefox. And then there is the similar rendering across WebKit browsers. Firefox renders some things like line-height completely differently.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#36

Post by PaulHoule »

Funny, for my own reasons I uninstalled Chrome and switched to IE9 on my main computer.

Although IE9 supports standards well on paper, it's shocking how many sites aimed at "webby" sorts of people don't work on IE9.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#38

Post by emehrkay »

PaulHoule wrote: post #36

Funny, for my own reasons I uninstalled Chrome and switched to IE9 on my main computer. Although IE9 supports standards well on paper, it's shocking how many sites aimed at "webby" sorts of people don't work on IE9.

Why would you choose to use ie9 over something like chrome?

edit: Why not move to another browser with better standards support like firefox or opera?

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#39

Post by khuey »

emehrkay wrote: post #38
PaulHoule wrote: post #36

Funny, for my own reasons I uninstalled Chrome and switched to IE9 on my main computer. Although IE9 supports standards well on paper, it's shocking how many sites aimed at "webby" sorts of people don't work on IE9.

Why would you choose to use ie9 over something like chrome? edit: Why not move to another browser with better standards support like firefox or opera?

IE's standards support is pretty decent these days. There are other reasons to choose a browser besides support for standards too.

Re: The Open Web Needs You Now

#40

Post by gcp »

gerggerg wrote: post #33

I think the doom and gloom is a bit over-hyped, and the other browser authors probably have no choice but to implement the webkit prefixes. They just don't have the install numbers to do otherwise. I don't like the situation but I see it as inevitable and not that big of a deal. The only way for this to change, is to build into the spec that once a feature is no longer experimental its vendor specific tag name gets d…

I think the doom and gloom is a bit over-hyped, and the other browser authors probably have no choice but to implement the webkit prefixes.

I understood the outcry from W3C being caused by Opera and Mozilla declaring that this is exactly what they will be doing. The situation is particularly bleak in mobile devices due to Android + iPhone + iPad WebKit monopolies.

Post reply on HN