> When that solution isn't wanted, the polyfill offers another path.

A solution is only a solution if it solves the problem.

This sort of thing, basically a "reverse X/Y problem", is an intellectually dishonest maneuver, where a thing is dubbed a "solution" after just, like, redefining the problem to not include the parts that make it a problem.

The problem is that there is content that works today that will break after the Chrome team follows through on their announced plans of shirking on their responsibility to not break the Web. That's what the problem is. Any "solution" that involves people having to go around un-breaking things that the web browser broke is not a solution to the problem that the Chrome team's actions call for people to go around un-breaking things that the web browser broke.

> As mentioned previously, the RSS/Atom XML feed can be augmented with one line, <script src="xslt-polyfill.min.js" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"></script>, which will maintain the existing behavior of XSLT-based transformation to HTML.

Oh, yeah? It's that easy? So the Chrome team is going to ship a solution where when it encounters un-un-fucked content that depends on XSLT, Chrome will transparently fix it up as if someone had injected this polyfill import into the page, right? Or is this another instance where well-paid engineers on the Chrome team who elected to accept the responsibility of maintaining the stability of the Web have decided that they like the getting-paid part but don't like the maintaining-the-stability-of-the-Web part and are talking out of both sides of their mouths?

▲

shadowgovt 20 hours ago | parent [-]

> So the Chrome team is going to ship a solution where when it encounters un-un-fucked content that depends on XSLT, Chrome will transparently fix it up as if someone had injected this polyfill import into the page, right?

As with most things on the web, the answer is "They will if it breaks a website that a critical mass of users care about."

And that's the issue with XSLT: it won't.

▲

cxr 16 hours ago | parent [-]

> As with most things on the web, the answer is "They will if it breaks a website that a critical mass of users care about."

This is a (poor) attempt at gaslighting/retconning.

The phrase "Don't break the Web" is not original to this thread.

(I can't say I look forward to your follow-up reply employing sleights of hand like claims about how stuff like Flash that was never standardized, or the withdrawal of experimental APIs that weren't both stable/finalized and implemented by all the major browsers, or the long tail of stuff on developer.mozilla.org that is marked "deprecated" (but nonetheless still manages to work) are evidence of your claim and that browser makers really do have a history of doing this sort of thing. This is in fact the first time something like this has actually happened—all because there are engineers working on browsers at Google (and Mozilla and Apple) that are either confused about how the Web differs from, say, Android and iOS, or resentful of their colleagues who get to work on vendor SDKs where the API surface area is routinely rev'd to remove whatever they've decided no longer aligns with their vision for their platform. That's not what the Web is, and those engineers can and should go work on Android and iOS instead of sabotaging the far more important project of attending to the only successful attempt at a vendor-neutral, ubiquitous, highly accessible, substrate for information access that no one owns and that doesn't fuck over the people who rely on it being stable.)

▲

shadowgovt 11 hours ago | parent [-]

Mozilla's own site expounds on "Don't Break the Web" as "Web browser vendors should be able to implement new web technologies without causing a difference in rendering or functionality that would cause their users to think a website is broken and try another browser as a result."

There is no meaningful risk of that here. The percentage of web users who are trying to understand content via XSLT'd RSS is nearly zero, and for everyone who is, there is either polyfill or server-side rendering to correct the issue.

> and those engineers can and should go work on Android and iOS

With respect: taken to its logical conclusion, that would be how the web as a client-renderable system dies and is replaced by Android and iOS apps as the primary portal to interacting with HTTP servers.

If the machine is so complex that nobody wants to maintain it, it will go unmaintained and be left behind.

▲

cxr 10 hours ago | parent [-]

> Mozilla's own site expounds on "Don't Break the Web" as

I'm a former Mozillian. I don't give a shit how it has been retconned by whomever happened to be writing copy that day, if indeed they have—it isn't even worth bothering to check.

"Don't break the Web" means exactly what it sounds like it means. Anything else is a lie.

> If the machine is so complex that nobody wants to maintain it, it will go unmaintained

There isn't a shortage of people willing to work on Web browsers. What there is is a finite amount of resources (in the form of compensation to engineers), and a set of people holding engineering positions at browser companies who, by those engineers' own admission, do not satisfy the conditions of being both personally qualified and equipped to do the necessary work here. But instead of stepping down from their role and freeing up resources to be better allocated to those who are equipped and willing, they're keeping their feet planted for the simple selfish reason that doing otherwise might entail a salary reduction and/or diminished power and influence. So they sacrifice the Web.

Fuck them.

▲

shadowgovt 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Sounds like you're volunteering to maintain the XSLT support in Firefox. That's great! That means when Chrome tries to decommission it, users who rely upon it will flock to Firefox instead because it's the only browser that works right with the websites they use.

Firefox ascendancy is overdue. Best of luck!

▲

8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

cxr 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Do you still beat your wife?

	▲	shadowgovt 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Don't understand the question, but I do wish you well in your future endeavors!