Not supported in Firefox and Safari. Also it seems most people forget that the more bloated the web platform is, the more resources are needed to develop and maintain a web browser engine.. Chromium is open-source, but it's already expensive to maintain a fork or even rebuild it..

▲

lenkite 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They just need to start deprecating and removing old features. They had no issues with XSLT removal even when some major sites like the library of congress used it. So the excuse of backward compatability has already proven to be a lie.

▲

zeroCalories 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

zb3 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> How did this happen?

That's pretty simple - Google has poured tons of money into Chrome and Mozilla. Google is not a charity so this was a strategic investment.

> You should go over to the CSS working group and let them know

That wouldn't work, money is what ultimately matters there.

▲

zeroCalories 8 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

singpolyma3 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

lol. What other browser vendors? Whatwg is just google is a trench coat. Edge is chrome. Firefox is funded by Google. So I guess apple who's main contribution is being years behind and having half their stuff be broken

▲

zeroCalories 7 hours ago | parent [-]

There's this really cool site where you can see how well supported a feature is: https://caniuse.com/?search=if

If Google controls everything, why is if() only supported on 59% traffic? Do you think any serious company will let their site break on 40% of clients? Do you think Apple's opinion is unimportant?

	▲	homebrewer 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Did you look at detailed usage stats? More specifically at things that do not count towards that 59%: older versions of Chrome add another 20%, various Chromium forks add a few percent more, so the rest of the internet accounts for less than 20%. I'd say this is pretty monopolistic for one company to control the means of more than 80% of traffic of doing its 'trafficking'.

▲

zb3 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> And the other browser vendors with conflicitng interests just go along with it?

When there's a conflict of interest they don't (Apple refuses to implement some APIs that would help making their walled garden app store more obsolete). But just maintaining a duopoly (Mozilla is funded by Google) is not a conflicting interest itself.

> Did you come to that opinion after engaging in the discussions with them?

With employees? There's no point. If you have a well paid job you will never accept the fact that what you're doing might not be so good after all..

	▲	zeroCalories 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> When there's a conflict of interest they don't (Apple refuses to implement some APIs that would help making their walled garden app store more obsolete). But just maintaining a duopoly (Mozilla is funded by Google) is not a conflicting interest itself. What makes you think Apple wants to maintain any sort of duopoly? Do you think they're happy that Edge became a Chrome skin? > With employees? There's no point. If you have a well paid job you will never accept the fact that what you're doing might not be so good after all.. Damn, so you haven't even tried discussing your issues with the people responsible? You seem to have a really strong opinion on something you haven't engaged with at all.