At least there was a distinction between web of documents (WWW) and shipped apps with custom canvas. Rendering apps with web’s DOM is stupid. It makes websites a mess and relies on everyone using the same monoculture of browsers (like we now have Chromium, WebKit and Gecko, all nearly identical).

If browser does not support one feature (like CSS’s transform), the whole house of cards breaks. It’s like making ASCII art in notepad and then expecting everyone to use the same notepad app with the same font and style, to not break our art proportions.

We need to split web into websites and webapps, with webapps being browser dependent or full custom canvases and websites being immutable human-readable and editable format.

  • nek0d3r@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For how much web content is reliant on pretty much Chromium, it’s no comparison to the old competing standards between browsers. It is somewhat frustrating still, but I’d much rather have what we do now than before.

    • andyburke@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      My young friends are forgetting the days of IE where we really did almost lose the web. It’s been a constant struggle, always, against the corporate interests who only see the internet as a money printer.

      I am more excited about the web today, with the fediverse for example, than I have been in a long time. Maybe since those days, when the future of any browser but IE was in doubt.

    • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because Flash and Java sucked, but I think, really an unpopular opinion, that their idea, that is custom runtime to play app, is better than hacking upon purerly document format. HTML is not PDF, it was not created to always look the same, it should be immutable and work even is some part is missing (not implemented).