Hacker News Reader

Comment by ntzm | Hacker News Reader

The HTML5 specification says where they're optional, so any browser that properly implements the spec

So I'm supposed to assume a browser properly implements a specification?

That's what we do every day we use any browser out there.

Yes, that's the point of having a set of standards. Otherwise you end up with an IE situation where everyone just develops for a single browser.

Otherwise you end up with a Chrome situation where everyone just develops for a single browser.

You're commented needed to modified for current times. ;-)

Chrome is based on Webkit which is free and open source so that is a terrible analogy with IE that was proprietary.

Its being open source isn’t mutually exclusive with its not adhering to the standard

Chrome uses its own Blink and V8 now, and there are many cases where developers only design for Chrome and small differences in implementation can be a huge pain in Firefox/Safari.

Blink is also under a FOSS license so I am not sure what the problem is. Competiting browsers use Blink as well.

If it was that simple there would be no reason for Safari to lag behind.

No professional developer targets a browser when developing a web site unless its a captured audience with no choice. Professional developers follow the specification. Those who do otherwise are only mentioned in reddit headlines and other hobbyist sites.

I understand that's the intent of standards, but rarely are there not limitations or bugs in implementations.

If this was truly the case, we wouldn't need things like Applitools to view our HTML documents in various browsers to scan for differences.

Well, that is literally the point of a specification.

You're missing my point. Assuming that all browsers correctly implement the specification is naive. I don't have an issues with standards themselves existing.

Isn't this what you'd be doing in any case?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com