JavaScript is ever evolving and it means you need to stick to one of the two browsers (WebKit or Firefox) and keep upgrading. XSLT hasn't changed in years. It's an actual standard instead of an evolving one.

I know that other independent browsers that I used to use back in the day just gave up because the pace of divergence pushed by the major implementations meant that it wasn't feasible to keep up independently.

I still miss Konqueror.

▲

pitaj 5 hours ago | parent [-]

JavaScript is backwards compatible. You can use an older standard supported by everything if you wish.

▲

Pet_Ant 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Really? Because I have an old iPad (4th gen?) that no longer works on many sites. If it was backwards compatible they'd still function.

	▲	O4epegb 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You are confusing backwards and forwards compatibility. Those sites may have added features that your iPad does not support, which is why it broke, if they have not added those, it might still work. However JS is not 100% backwards compatible either, it is in many cases, largely backwards compatible, but there are rare cases of bug fixes, or deprecated APIs that might be removed and break old code, but this is not even JS itself, it's more like web/engine standards.
	▲	demurgos 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		You are talking about forward compatibility. JS is backwards compatible: new engines support code using old features. JS is not forward compatible: old engines don't support code using new features. Regarding your iPad woes, the problem is not the engine but websites breaking compat with it. The distinction matters as it means that once a website is published it will keep working. The only way to break an existing website is to publish a new version usually. The XSLT situation is note-worthy as it's an exception to this rule.