+15 year? Where have you been when everybody standardized on IE6 and this was a bad thing?
I thought it is new generation that reinvents the wheel but it seems I'm mistaken.
I thought it is new generation that reinvents the wheel but it seems I'm mistaken.
Chrome on the other hand is starting to be a problem because it's too damn fast at implementing new stuff (which are accepted as standard). Web-developers then start using those new features and the code they write suddenly doesn't work on other browsers, because those browser just don't support those new features yet.
That's why we got webpack. That's why we got babel and polyfills. And that's why frontend development sucks a lot lately. Because you have the choice of doing X the easy and fast way, that currently works only with Chrome, because no other browser implemented that yet. Or, you can do it the hard and slow way, that works with all browsers.
And this is not something that I'm pulling out of thin air. This has been discussed several times here, in HN.
The central point is avoiding lock-in, with the long term objective of maintaining a competitive browser landscape. Code for one browser, and we'll be collectively screwed when Chrome development reaches Google Reader status.
CSS Flex is a standard. If Konqueror, Firefox, Edge, or whatever other browser doesn't support it (I know they support it now, but that wasn't the case 2 or 3 years ago), it's not any of my business. I'll keep using Flex because it's an accepted standard. And my webpages will work on any browser that supports that standard. If that means that my website works only on Webkit-based browsers, well, then that's really not up to me to fix, isn't it? That is something that the people behind other browsers should fix, by implementing "Flex".
it's not any of my business.
So what is your business?
It is nothing special. It's your standard CRUD app. Not even an SPA. From what I can tell the tech they use is all at least 5 years old.
They obviously never even checked to see if it worked in Firefox. It should work in Firefox. There is no excuse for it not to.
If you are actually analyzing your featureset and saying "I could really use these new standards Firefox doesn't support", that's one thing. If you are just coding whatever and seeing it works in Chrome and calling it a day, you aren't coding to a standard, you are coding to whatever happens to work in Chrome.
Are Chrome devs implementing new standards after they become standards, or are Chrome representatives turning Chrome features into standards?