![]() > With adoptedStyleSheets they're objecting to making backwards incompatible changes As Chrome releases 400 new APIs each year, it's impossible to track them all. These are two I know of, that's why I said "sometimes". Other chromium-based browsers may want to know as well, via these channels." "this is a case where we're going from no permission prompt to a permission prompt, I think a PSA and developer communication is a good idea. WebMIDI allows enumeration of devices without asking the user for permission: (note this is a part of a whole bunch of hardware APIs that Chrome just shipped, no consensus needed) Backwards-incompatible changes are definitely an issue here.". ![]() adoptedStyleSheets is used on about ~.8% of page loads in Chrome now. Where we differ might be that I don't see the "many browsers" qualification as applying to the first statement.Ĭonstructible Stylesheets was released despite objections from both Safari and Firefox when it had both badly designed API and an easily reproduced race condition. Statement (a) isn't browser-specific, and thus it is false, since on Firefox, setting an element's outerHTML will change it and its descendants if its parent node is a document fragment (which is not a parent element). Statement (b) is true, since Chromium- and WebKit-based browsers will throw an exception if the element doesn't have a parent node which is also an element. This contains two independent statements, (a) "If the element has no parent element, setting its outerHTML property will not change it or its descendants," and (b) "Many browsers will also throw an exception. ![]() Many browsers will also throw an exception." I interpret this as, "If the element has no parent element, setting its outerHTML property will not change it or its descendants. Well, it literally says, "If the element has no parent element, setting its outerHTML property will not change it or its descendants. Nonetheless, OP's recommendation that Apple note which versions of Safari a certain bug is fixed in seems like a very good idea that should be adopted. And yet that's often what it feels like using web/JavaScript frameworks and browsers that change from week to week. ![]() Lastly, as a developer, I don't like building on quicksand. And I certainly don't want to have to use Chrome/Chromium for everything. Many developers may hate it and want to usher us into Google's PWA future, but I'm absolutely fine where things are right now. I have little desire for web apps to reach complete feature parity with native apps, or to have complete access to all hardware and OS features. Personally I appreciate Safari's resistance to constant featurism in general, and conservative approach to features that are likely to compromise power usage or privacy. ![]() Safari seems to be the last bulwark against a Chrome-only web driven by features of the week.įull Chrome/Chromium on iOS could very well end that, and I'm not thrilled at the prospect. > actually improving Safari, in order for it to stay relevant and competitive It's clear they do a great job in difficult circumstances and it's several high-level policy decisions at Apple make things really challenging for them: they're unable to talk about when bugs and their fixes will (or will not) be present in release software and Safari updates are tied to OS releases. I really feel for the team who are maintaining the code. While it's fixed in webkit, the webkit team were unable to tell us if the fix would be in the shipping version of 16.4 and, despite discovering and reporting the bug before it even hit a beta, the shipping 16.4 has the bug. The workaround is unfortunately rather gnarly - having to rely on an order in a list that's not guaranteed by the spec and indeed different on Android. Requesting an 'environment-facing' camera using getUserMedia now provides the ultra-wide camera (rather than the usual standard angle lens). We encountered a relatively major regression during the iOS 16.4 beta which unfortunately went live with the release version of 16.4. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |