Twitter | Search | |
Anne van Kesteren Dec 4
Itโ€™s greatly encouraging in that talking to people at the Mozilla All Hands, we are still committed to driving the Gecko and Servo implementations of the web platform.
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
This might be good time to reiterate why independent implementations, both at a high-level (e.g., browser) and low-level (e.g., text encodings) are valued and important to a healthy and thriving web platform. (And please do feel free to chime in and discuss.)
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren
No single company should control the future of the web platform.
Reply Retweet Like More
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
With a single implementation, bugs will become features much more quickly, leading to ecosystem decay. (We might still have the IE6 three pixel gap.)
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
Independent implementations ensure standards can be implemented from first principles and are not just a bunch of words to appease a complicit standards group.
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
It allows companies to experiment with radical new strategies to solve old problems better (e.g., Servo). Such a refactoring would be impossible without standards and tests.
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
Standards with independent implementations are vastly easier to adopt in new devices and platforms.
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
Software monocultures are bad for security. Almost every security bug will affect all users.
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
It protects against stagnation of the web platform. E.g., if the company behind it stops investing in it. (Again, see IE6.)
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @annevk
Independent implementations, and therefore voices, can also block bad ideas much more successfully. (E.g., PNaCl, Dart, ActiveX.)
Reply Retweet Like
Anne van Kesteren Dec 5
Replying to @stpeter @__farre__
Again, I welcome your thoughts. Many thanks to and for helping out!
Reply Retweet Like
Anthony Muscat ๐ŸŒˆ Dec 7
Replying to @annevk
Yeah but itโ€™s not closed source project like IE6 itโ€™s open source project that anyone can submit a PR for. So the same issues with had with IE6 would not happen.
Reply Retweet Like
Ilkka Poutanen Dec 7
Replying to @anthonyjmuscat @annevk
True, but submitted PR's != code running on people's computers :) I would hope Chromium governance is up the task of ensuring a bright future, but would definitely prefer many more engines on the playing field.
Reply Retweet Like
rugk Dec 7
indeed it may be open-source, but in the end Google decides about Chromium's direction. You could only fork it, but you cannot seriously maintain a whole browser engine without many many people/a company behind it.
Reply Retweet Like
Anthony Muscat ๐ŸŒˆ Dec 8
Yeah it is the case but google does ask the community but like you said because itโ€™s open source if people donโ€™t like where itโ€™s going they can fork it like Apple did to khtml to and google did to WebKit. ๐Ÿ˜€
Reply Retweet Like
rugk Dec 9
" google does ask the community" โ€“ did they really ask when they started forcing you to login to Chrome/ium when logging in to any Google service? (just one example)
Reply Retweet Like