←back to thread

418 points akagusu | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.393s | source
Show context
andsoitis ◴[] No.45954687[source]
I don’t know. The author makes some arguments I could get entertain and get behind, but they also enumerate the immense complexity that they want web browsers to support (incl. Gopher).

Whether or not Google deprecating XSLT is a “political” decision (in authors words), I don’t know that I know for sure, but I can imagine running the Chrome project and steering for more simplicity.

replies(5): >>45954991 #>>45955005 #>>45955021 #>>45955842 #>>45958065 #
coldpie ◴[] No.45955005[source]
The drama around the XSLT stuff is ridiculous. It's a dead format that no one uses[1], no one will miss, no one wants to maintain, and that provides significant complexity and attack surface. It's unambiguously the right thing to do to remove it. No one who actually works in the web space disagrees.

Yes, it's a problem that Chrome has too much market share, but XSLT's removal isn't a good demonstration of that.

[1] Yes, I already know about your one European law example that you only found out exists because of this drama.

replies(5): >>45955125 #>>45955129 #>>45955138 #>>45955385 #>>45958291 #
1. bryanrasmussen ◴[] No.45955125[source]
>Yes, I already know about your one European law example

What example is that?

replies(1): >>45955284 #
2. coldpie ◴[] No.45955284[source]
This page is styled via an XSLT transform: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/politicalparties/index_en.xml The drama mongers like to bring it up as an example of something that will be harmed by XSLT's removal, but it already has an HTML version, which is the one people actually use.