[HN Gopher] Interop 2022: browsers working together to improve t...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Interop 2022: browsers working together to improve the web for
       developers
        
       Author : twapi
       Score  : 101 points
       Date   : 2022-03-06 13:14 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (web.dev)
 (TXT) w3m dump (web.dev)
        
       | nattaylor wrote:
       | Neat. The big players seem committed and there is a scoring
       | system to measure progress.
        
       | throwaway984393 wrote:
       | Shouldn't it be "to improve the web for _users_ " ? Developer
       | Experience is important, but it shouldn't be focused on in
       | isolation from User Experience. If we were just talking about
       | improving an IDE, it's fine, but "the web" is about much more
       | than development.
       | 
       | Personally I think the way web browsers work is kind of insane
       | from a user perspective. "The Web" is obsessed with technical
       | expertise and custom code. An application like MS PowerPoint
       | (pick any other design tool you prefer) is designed for _users_
       | to create multi-layered media content and display it anywhere,
       | without requiring a college degree or months /years of experience
       | to make something. I don't think people who actively work on the
       | web have considered how over-complicated it all is. For an
       | industry that talks obsessively about "innovation" and
       | "disruption", it can't seem to conceive of a post-web-browser
       | world.
        
         | alwillis wrote:
         | If they get the interoperability right, the result will less
         | JavaScript to download and fewer hacks. Users will get a faster
         | and less klugey web experience across the board.
        
           | chiefalchemist wrote:
           | Yes. But faster doesn't necessarily mean better. I mean of
           | course we don't want slow. But a fast loading shite
           | experience is still shite.
        
         | hombre_fatal wrote:
         | Well, the MS PowerPoint analogue would be any of the tools
         | users use to build content on the web today. My dad runs a
         | Shopify store with a theme he liked and modified. My sisters
         | use Squarespace for their projects and similar tools with
         | massive theme collections to choose from. One of them,
         | originally very non-technical, even learned Twitter Bootstrap
         | when she wanted to go her own way.
         | 
         | The MS PowerPoint user doesn't care about what the Windows
         | application developers are talking about on Windows Hacker
         | News, either.
         | 
         | Also, I think we pat ourselves too hard on the back when we go
         | "surely all this stuff is way too complicated for people."
         | Frankly, things are just becoming easier and easier.
        
           | askonomm wrote:
           | I'm not sure this makes sense. My wife is learning front-end
           | development now as I did 15 years ago and holy shit, to get
           | an actual job you need to basically somehow magically become
           | a mid-level engineer. Unit/automated testing, myriad of FE
           | frameworks, OO and FP, CSS/Less/Sass (grid, flex, cascade,
           | etc), multiple build tools, and this just to get your first
           | job.
        
         | kitsunesoba wrote:
         | There are places where improvements on both dev experience and
         | user experience intersect. For example, if the big browsers all
         | delivered a much more robust set of easily styleable standard
         | widgets, that would benefit devs by reducing the amount of
         | custom widget work needed and benefit users with more
         | consistent behavior and reduced payload sizes.
         | 
         | Things like that should be prioritized the most. Once all of
         | that is taken care of, browser vendors could start doing cycles
         | of switching between focus on dev experience and user
         | experience.
        
         | alvarlagerlof wrote:
         | If development is bad/hard due to inconsistencies needing extra
         | tools for cross-browser, the experience is likely to be worse
         | than necessary for users too. Usually very connected. Never saw
         | something good made with Silverlight.
        
           | chiefalchemist wrote:
           | There's some truth to this. That said - speaking for a friend
           | - (bad) UX designers and (bad) web designers consistently do
           | more damage to users than a friction-y developer experience.
        
         | jacobmischka wrote:
         | Sure, but they're focusing specifically on things that
         | developers are already doing but are just more of a pain than
         | they should be, usually requiring hacky workarounds,
         | preprocessors, or browser specific overrides.
        
         | jdrc wrote:
         | they can always compete for that though, but you don't want
         | them to compete for the protocols
        
       | culi wrote:
       | The last feature vanilla CSS needs to render most pre-processors
       | obsolete (imo) is nesting. The latest CSS nesting specs are
       | looking great and it's kinda sad to not see it being prioritized
        
       | TheAceOfHearts wrote:
       | It's been a while since I looked into it, but are storage limits
       | still a pain to handle across browsers?
       | 
       | According to this article, Safari doesn't yet have properly
       | documented limits on storage.
       | 
       | https://web.dev/storage-for-the-web/
        
       | micromacrofoot wrote:
       | Subgrid and reliable viewport units on mobile devices are the
       | holy grail for me. Very happy about these priorities. Thank you
       | to everyone involved.
        
       | jdrc wrote:
       | > New viewport units
       | 
       | how many units does CSS have?? Shouldnt part of the improvement
       | be to simplify and declutter the web's fundamentals?
        
         | onion2k wrote:
         | Apart from the duplicates (cm, inches, etc which can all be
         | derived from mm with a basic calc) they all do different
         | things. vw, vh, vmin, and vmax are useful for filling a screen,
         | px is obviously related to the screen size, em, rem, ch and lh
         | are relative to the current font or root font. There isn't much
         | clutter there.
        
         | silviot wrote:
         | Obligatory XKCD: https://m.xkcd.com/927/
        
       | timwis wrote:
       | I'm impressed safari is at the table. If I understand correctly,
       | they only fix bugs once every six months, and don't give any
       | indication of timelines as matter of policy. For example, hasn't
       | locaStorage been broken in safari for ages? Or am I a bit behind
       | the times? (Would have hoped to see that on the list if so)
        
         | culi wrote:
         | Safari has really stepped up their game recently and made
         | amazing strides in a very short amount of time. There's even
         | some features that they're now ahead of the game on (like color
         | mixing and the new color spaces).
         | 
         | Not sure about the localStorage issue. Are you referring to the
         | fact that iPhones (and macs?) will automatically delete the
         | localStorage for websites that haven't been visited in the past
         | week?
        
       | ksec wrote:
       | We used to have ACID 2 and ACID 3, do we have something similar
       | to ACID 4? Or at least a subset of features that are _guarantee_
       | to work across all browsers. While Caniuse is useful for checking
       | support, many times there are browser that support something but
       | it is buggy or differ from one another.
        
         | jefftk wrote:
         | I think the closest thing to ACID these days is the web
         | platform tests: https://wpt.fyi
         | 
         | Instead of one giant test, we have tests for individual
         | features.
        
       | ishitatsuyuki wrote:
       | Funny that the subgrid example actually has a screenshot from a
       | browser that doesn't support subgrid:
       | https://github.com/GoogleChrome/web.dev/issues/7453
       | 
       | Well, that does say something about the dominance of Chrome...
        
         | culi wrote:
         | To be fair, Firefox is the only browser that _has_ implemented
         | subgrid. It 's a pretty new feature
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | I'm absolutely horrified at what the "modern web" has become.
       | More complexity, more bugs, more barriers to entry for anyone
       | else wanting to write their own browser and have it be usable for
       | most sites. Google seems determined to squeeze everyone else out
       | with this feature-churn.
        
         | agust wrote:
         | If websites/web apps are adopting these features, maybe it's
         | because they're useful? You're free to use a 10 years old
         | browser and keep reading document-like websites. In the
         | meantime I'll be using all the goodness the web can bring
         | today, hoping it will end up fully replacing the very costly,
         | heavy, intrusive native apps, that only work on the system
         | they've been built for.
        
           | erezsh wrote:
           | The problem is that there are so many ways to do things, and
           | every website uses a different subset.
           | 
           | Need to layout your elements? Great, that's what flex is for.
           | I mean grid. I mean float. I mean the position attribute. I
           | mean tables. I mean the margin attribution.
           | 
           | I'm really looking forward to a better integration of
           | Webassembly. Then we can each pick our own libraries for
           | layout/colors/video etc., and writing a browser will be more
           | like writing a VM than writing huge entire ecosystems.
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | The problem is exactly that attitude turning what used to be
           | highly accessible _and interactive_ sites into elephantine
           | "web apps" that need the latest and most user-hostile version
           | of $BIG_BROWSER (which doesn't run on older OS and thus
           | hardware too) to do what was perfectly possible with
           | technology of a decade ago, or even less functionality.
           | 
           | I wonder what is more responsible for that; the fact that
           | people don't care about history, or that corporate propaganda
           | has pushed them away from realising it.
        
             | agust wrote:
             | If websites are turned into web apps with more features,
             | it's probably because it's bringing in money, in the form
             | of users or consumers, don't you think? If consumers tended
             | to like simple "interactive" websites like we used to have
             | 10 years ago, companies would probably not bother building
             | modern web apps. But that's not the case. Web apps, in
             | general, do provide a way better experience than simple
             | websites, and users do like them. There is no propaganda at
             | work here, just simple market mechanisms.
             | 
             | If anyone is to blame for showing that a better user
             | experience is possible, it's probably those who pushed for
             | quality UI in native apps, that web apps are trying to
             | match.
        
         | tpmx wrote:
         | They won that fight a few years ago.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-03-06 23:01 UTC)