Hacker News Reader

Comment by dfabulich | Hacker News Reader

> Who needs web standards, right?

This new thing (signed HTTP exchanges) is an IETF draft. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed...

As usual, Chrome is the first browser to implement this, but they're participating in the normal standards process. (Microsoft is in favor. The Chrome team generally ships stuff if at least one other major browser vendor approves.)

View on HN

Normally I'd rush to Chrome's defense here (see my post history) but I have to agree with others about Chrome kind of breaking the process here. Other browser vendors have large concerns with this spec, so it's quite surprising that it's shipping at this scale.

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Chrome has done this before, e.g. with QUIC.

But Firefox and Safari aren't on board. I thought everyone had agreed that browser flags were the best way to implement features that weren't actually approved/standardised yet

Turning it on when they know there's no consensus is breaking the web standard

I stand corrected. But I still think that AMP and Google in general are bad for an open, competitive internet.

This doesn't mean anything though, they all crap out rfcs whenever they have a new feature to push. And they all usually agree with what each other pushes, but even if they don't, the browsers will just forge ahead however they want. Standards are diplomatic cover.

They do participate in the standards process, and that's great, but it doesn't also mean they don't subvert it or shove tech down everyone's throats until it becomes a defacto standard that you have to implement if you want to stay competitive.

A draft written by a google employee.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com