OU blog

Personal Blogs

neil

oh dear

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Neil Anderson, Wednesday, 15 Feb 2012, 19:19

This one is going to run and run. By this I mean FF et al supporting some -webkit specific features. Note: that's some not all.

At first I wasn't too worried, now I'm beginning to think that I should be. A List Apart has published two articles; one is Tantek's explaination of why FF are doing this and the other Lea's [I think] best-practice approach.

Now, given that Tantek was responsible for some of the ugliest hacks ever... Probably I'm being unfair.

I'm of a strange age [in web-terms]; too young to remember the browser wars, too young to remember when IE6 was the only browser in town. [Although I do remember the BPOS (buggy piece of s...e) that was IE 4.7 for Mac] In my day it was all about validated XHTML 1.0. As long as we separated presentation from content we were doing our job. Even if it was an utter bugger to get IE6 to play with us presentation-wise.

In my last post on this subject I suggested that there didn't seem to be too much harm in letting browser-vendors set the agenda. I'm now falling back from that position.

The problem is that, because certain, let's call them what they are, layout-engines, have locked down the mobile platform, other engines have to honour their CSS. Perhaps in a different way. This is bad.

A couple of weeks ago I gave up on FF as my day-to-day browser, the thing now is a bloated cowp. A sad travesty of the Phoenix that it was. For me it has gone the way of IE6. The way of all browsers in fact.

I still use FF as my developer browser, [it has FireBug] but I now use Chrome for my trolling. I've noticed that some of my sites are broken. Which is annoying as I'd tested them. The goalposts have been changed. Given that Chrome updates, silently, about once a week, testing is now useless. The goalposts could be anywhere anyday.

This is the problem. We knew what we had to do when we were mired in the IE6 fiasco—create standards. And have browsers [and developers] stick to them.

The last time I wrote about this I thought that I could just walk away from this mess, but I can't. True, I don't use experimental-vendor-specific attributes. But if we don't have standards? Then the floor can be whipped out from under us at any time.

It's odd, this is almost exactly LOWSRC When you play with computers you'll be fixing the same problem forever if you don't watch out. That seems to be the way that we are headed.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post
neil

breaking the web

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Neil Anderson, Thursday, 9 Feb 2012, 20:32

I've spent the last couple of days resting-up [when not working] trying to stick to my new sumo wrestler diet [without the beer] and doing some maths. That was the plan for tonight too.

Before I get started with work it is my wont to do a wee bit of displacement activity [like this!] So I was perusing my feed reader when I noticed that a lot of standardnistas were posting—something had happened. 

[Probably the best description of the problem is here...]

I don't do much [creative] web work any more, but it was where I started OU-wise and I retain a love for and an interest in it. I'll certainly create sites in the future, so my first thought was what does this mean for me? Not-a-lot; most of the features they're talking about I don't use. I don't use them because of exactly the problems they are talking about. Then I had some other thoughts.

  1. I do sometimes use these when I writing javascript CSS.
  2. I will probably have to use them when I re-design the nonsense this summer for mobiles [the current plan].
  3. The main thrust of the argument is that this might lead us back into the type of browser lock-in hell that we had with IE6

Three is the clincher here. If it is the problem.

I'm not sure that there is a big problem in allowing webkit to create de facto standards. Most bleeding-edge web stuff uses webkit [doesn't work anywhere else]; in many ways it's what's driving the web forward. Mozilla and the rest are chasing the game.

Then we have the total mess that are web standards. Nobody seems to be able to agree on anything. [Although I should stress that that isn't CSS3, which is what the current stushie is all about. Although HTML5 seems to have become the new web 2.0; a catch-all term for a whole load of different things.]

Here's something else[about accessibility] that I read today, something that I totally agree with. [Again a totally different specification; same mess though.] If we can't get that right [and there's some pretty basic stuff there]?

Perhaps we'd be doing ourselves a favour letting the browser vendors drive the web forward? Especially if they agree to support each others implementations? [Although I might not have completely understood that bit, it seems a little too good to be true and I worry anytime IE is in the mix.]

In the end we coped with the mess that was IE6 and we have a better browser gene-pool nowadays. Do we really have anything to worry about.

There also seems to be a bit of browser-sniffing going on here, which is always evil and should never been done in anything that you intend for the open web.

 

Permalink 3 comments (latest comment by Neil Anderson, Friday, 10 Feb 2012, 14:44)
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 252566