Technology

EEE yall

The W3C encourages browsers to add experimental APIs so that developers can test them. Do you expect a brand new browser to be rolled out every time someone comes up with an idea?

The issue is with sites using a working draft in production. We also don't know if that's what's happening or if that's the API being used, though.The W3C encourages browsers to add experimental APIs so that developers can test them. Do you expect a brand new browser to be rolled out every time someone comes up with an idea?

The issue is with sites using a working draft in production. We also don't know if that's what's happening or if that's the API being used, though.

Edit: It is Discord using the AudioData API. Again, though, that's on them. Experimental APIs aren't supposed to be used in production since the standard can, and often does, change.

How can they not support jpg xl? It’s such a huge thing

I think Moz helped write and supports this. I even think it's (partially enabled in nightly?)

Not sure if these built in decoders are supported though. Seems a bit dangerous to expose native codecs directly from the web to be honest, since you'll end up with wildly varying support across browsers.

Firefox and Safari is also implementing experimental features often.

I remember ages ago websites were all focused on "works best on Internet Explorer" or "please use Netscape for the best experience"

We managed a good solid decade after that where browsers all somewhat caught up to each other and now we're going back that way again, with each website just YOLO implementing APIs that aren't fully supported (with no polyfils or fallbacks)

When you did that back in IE7/8/9, you missed out on rounded corners or drop shadows, now whole parts of apps won't work unless you're on chrome 🤯

If you clicked the link. It says experimental technology. It's not mozilla's fault Chrome is adding features that are not standard. Sites like Discord for utilizing non standard API's.

is the other one less touchy?

Because Firefox is like a democracy, they prioritize work based on number of votes on issues/feature requests. The AudioEncoder API has literally just one vote, and the overall WebCodecs API that it's a part of only has five votes. This shows that there's very little demand for it, meaning very few sites actually use this (that or the vast majority of Firefox users don't use/need this feature). Why bother focusing your efforts on implementing something that most users don't care about? The higher priority things that most Firefox users care about is stuff like performance, and Mozilla have been making some good progress too on that front.

This is an experimental API that hasn't been finalized yet. Firefox devs has limited engineering resource and simply can't keep up with Chrome's push to implement experimental/proposal API. Safari also hasn't implemented this yet because they also usually wait until the API finalized, which can take quite a while.

Shocking news: people are people everywhere, not just on 'rival' platforms.

Care to elaborate? I can't make sense of your response

Yeah unfortunately it looks like they are here too, oh well at least it's money out of spez's hands