DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
70% Positive
Analyzed from 707 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#canvas#https#html#google#web#chrome#com#standard#buy#mozilla
Discussion (22 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
Looks very cool, and showed a pretty message indicating there's even more:
Use Chrome... idontthinkiwill.jpg and aren't we supposed to reject these technologies that allow Google to Embrace, Extend, Extinguish[1]?Kudos to the artist in spite of this unfortunately esoteric (wish it weren't) concern
[1](hope I'm wrong about it being a triple E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis... )
In what way is this technology a means to embrace, extend and extinguish?
This seems like a logical extension of existing web APIs. If we reject everything out of hand then the platform won't improve. It's going through the standards process:
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/10650
AFAICT, this is a web standard and expected to get buy in from Safari and Firefox before shipping to users. For now it's an experiment you have to specifically enable with flags. No different than any other browser that runs experiments
Here's one from from Apple from 2017
https://webkit.org/blog/7504/webgpu-prototype-and-demos/
Here's another from last year
https://webkit.org/blog/17118/a-step-into-the-spatial-web-th...
If it hasn’t already got buy in then it isn’t a web standard, it’s just a Google proposal. Something isn’t automatically a web standard just because Google thinks it’s a good idea.
Here are Mozilla and WebKit positions on this:
> This proposal attempts to solve multiple problems with a single solution. We (Mozilla) recognize the motivation for solving some of the problems, but believe that this is not the right solution to each problem, or in some case a step in the wrong direction.
— https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1076
— https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/630
As far as I can see, nobody outside of Google has committed to implementing this.
> If this ships, this is what we think we'll be facing, but in reverse. Your rendering would become the defacto default. Does this help see where we're coming from?
One side cares about a private, free, open web; the other devs made something COOL and potentially USEFUL (ship it!). Both highly intelligent of course, shockingly different priorities.
--- start quote ---
Philip: First, google slides is written in svg, so that won't change with this. But google docs is using canvas, so they might be a candidate. … they might want to integrate this peicemeal, this API allows them to start to adopt the feature slowly,
--- end quote ---
This reads to me like "Google Docs decided to go with canvas sometime ago [1], found it to be too hard, so pushed Chrome to have a way to support HTML in Canvas. The rest is just post-hoc justifications"
[1] https://workspaceupdates.googleblog.com/2021/05/Google-Docs-...
Happy to praise anything good Google does (speedy, reliable YouTube delivery). When they don’t get buy in first, I’m suspicious. They know, but should also care about how bad it is for the web for sites to dictate the browsers we use.
1. It's not a standard. It's a scribble on a napkin in a working group's repo: https://github.com/WICG/html-in-canvas Created and edited by people from Google.
2. Chrome continuously ships "standards" like this that they create with no buy in and against any and all opposition.
3. Neither of your links have any relation to HTML in Canvas.
I heard you like html-in-canvas demos, but what about canvas-in-html-in-canvas-in-html?
I naively thought the “demo” was a demo, not a X posting by a twit.
https://compiz-web.vercel.app
https://arrival.space/htmlcanvas
I wonder if it works in more than just Chrome Canary now.