←back to thread

Google is killing the open web, part 2

(wok.oblomov.eu)
418 points akagusu | 1 comments | 17 Nov 25 15:41 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nwellnhof ◴[17 Nov 25 16:33 UTC] No.45955183[source]▶
Removing XSLT from browsers was long overdue and I'm saying that as ex-maintainer of libxslt who probably triggered (not caused) this removal. What's more interesting is that Chromium plans to switch to a Rust-based XML parser. Currently, they seem to favor xml-rs which only implements a subset of XML. So apparently, Google is willing to remove standards-compliant XML support as well. This is a lot more concerning.
replies(11): >>45955239 #>>45955425 #>>45955442 #>>45955667 #>>45955747 #>>45955961 #>>45956057 #>>45957011 #>>45957170 #>>45957880 #>>45977574 #
xmcp123 ◴[17 Nov 25 16:37 UTC] No.45955239[source]▶
It’s interesting to see the casual slide of Google towards almost internet explorer 5.1 style behavior, where standards can just be ignored “because market share”.

Having flashbacks of “<!--[if IE 6]> <script src="fix-ie6.js"></script> <![endif]-->”

replies(4): >>45955346 #>>45955370 #>>45955787 #>>45956032 #
Aurornis ◴[17 Nov 25 16:50 UTC] No.45955370[source]▶
I don’t get the comparison. The XSLT deprecation has support beyond Google.
replies(1): >>45956044 #
amarant ◴[17 Nov 25 17:53 UTC] No.45956044[source]▶
It's just ill-informed ideological thinking. People see Google doing anything and automatically assume it's a bad thing and that it's only happening because Google are evil.

HN has historically been relatively free of such dogma, but it seems times are changing, even here

replies(4): >>45956343 #>>45956372 #>>45958522 #>>45959017 #
1. cxr ◴[17 Nov 25 21:26 UTC] No.45958522{3}[source]▶
> It's just ill-informed ideological thinking.

> People see Google doing anything and automatically assume it's a bad thing and that it's only happening because Google are evil.

Sure, but a person also needs to be conscious of the role that this perception plays in securing premature dismissal of anyone who ventures to criticize.

(In quoting your comment above, I've deliberately separated the first sentence from the second. Notice how easily the observation of the phenomenon described in the second sentence can be used to undergird the first claim, even though the first claim doesn't actually follow as a necessary consequence from the second.)