deeplinks
deeplinks | standards-positions | |
---|---|---|
4 | 180 | |
510 | 598 | |
- | 1.0% | |
0.0 | 7.6 | |
3 months ago | 2 months ago | |
TypeScript | Python | |
MIT License | Mozilla Public License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
deeplinks
-
#3 Risin' Newsletter
https://github.com/WesleyAC/deeplinks Author: WesleyAC
-
Embed deeplinks.js into userscript
Recently, I came to a js libary that allows you to link to any text selection of a web page. That is deeplinks.js, which is here. It would be useful that your link points directly to the section you need especially the page is long. It would require the author of the page to use the deeplinks.js libary in order for the library to work but what if most of the pages does not include that library? So it would be nice to use the library even without the author including it. The solution is, of course, using a userscript. So I'm going to show you how to embed this library into a userscript and use it.
-
Deeplinks.js: Simple deep links to any selection of text on your website
https://github.com/WesleyAC/deeplinks#:~:text=not%20implemen...
standards-positions
-
Firefox Webserial Addon
You can read through the conversations to understand more of the context
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/100#is...
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/95#iss...
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/336
The main struggle is around giving informed consent that explains the risks. Understandably, browsers don't want to ship a "Set my printer on fire" button.
-
iOS404
You can check why Mozilla and Apple have opted to not support this.
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/154
https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/28
Neither Mozilla or Webkit are satisfied that the proposal is safe by default, and contains footguns for the user that can be pretty destructive.
-
Show HN: DualShock calibration in the browser using WebHID
FWIW Mozilla updated their position on Web Serial API to "neutral" and clarified that they might be okay with enabling the API with an add-on.
https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#webserial
Allowing serial but not HID would be really strange. With HID you get standard identifiers that let you filter out devices that are too dangerous for the web. With serial you get nothing. Even if you know a device is dangerous, there's no way to protect users from it.
-
Tailwind CSS v4.0.0 Alpha
Hasn't FireFox been dragging their asses on @scope? https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472
It took years to just convince them of the need for it. And I'm not sure anyone got convinced vs Chrome had already shipped it and Safari has it planned so they caved in.
Hard to believe FireFox used to be a leader of the modern web.
-
An HTML Switch Control
As mentioned by others, OK idea, but not a fan that this isn't standardized. After a quick search+peruse, these seem to indicate that it's not around the corner either. Happy (/hope) to be corrected.
https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/4180
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/990
-
Platform issues which disadvantage Firefox compared to first-party browsers
Mozilla's position on these specs is nicely outlined publicly and transparently as part of their standards-positions project: https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/100
I'm kinda glad it's not implemented in my browser, to be honest, because the whole thing seems like a security nightmare.
It's a shame it impacts some hobby usecases, but I don't think this outweighs the reasoning set out on the GitHub issue.
-
What Progressive Web App (PWA) Can Do Today
This should have big warnings on it. Some of these are not web standards; they are features implemented unilaterally by Google in Blink that have been explicitly rejected by both Mozilla and Apple on privacy and security grounds.
Take Web Bluetooth, for example:
Mozilla:
> This model is unsustainable and presents a significant risk to users and their devices.
— https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#web-bluetooth
Apple:
> Here are some examples of features we have decided to not yet implement due to fingerprinting, security, and other concerns, and where we do not yet see a path to resolving those concerns
— https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/
This is Microsoft’s Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish bullshit applied to the web platform by Google. Google keeps implementing these things despite all other major rendering engines rejecting them, convinces people that they are part of the web, resulting in sites like this, then people start asking why Firefox and Safari are “missing functionality”. These are not part of the web platform, they are Google APIs that have been explicitly rejected.
-
Why Are Tech Reporters Sleeping on the Biggest App Store Story?
Is BLE a PWA requirement? I think they explained their position pretty well here, regardless of whether I agree:
https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/95#iss...
-
Reason to Use Firefox Is Sync That Works
I took a glance at Can I Use what the difference between the last public release of Firefox and Chrome is [1] and they don't really have that big of a difference in the eyes of normal use-cases? Some of these aren't implemented purely because of privacy reasons, the proposals aren't finished yet or complexity [2].
Why would Firefox need to change to Chromium engine? The only websites I notice that don't work with Firefox is because of user-agent targetting or just putting 5-second time-outs in Youtube code on non-chrome webbrowsers [3].
Can you give some examples of websites not working on Firefox?
[1] https://caniuse.com/?compare=chrome+120%2Cfirefox+121&compar...
[2] https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
[3] https://www.neowin.net/news/youtube-seemingly-intentionally-...
- Mozilla's Position on CSS Scope