interop
wpt
interop | wpt | |
---|---|---|
15 | 20 | |
247 | 4,637 | |
3.6% | 1.1% | |
7.0 | 10.0 | |
9 days ago | 2 days ago | |
HTML | ||
- | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
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.
interop
-
Still no love for JPEG XL: Browser maker love-in snubs next-gen image format
There is popular demand (including from Adobe https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/430#iss... ), which is arguably evidence against (2).
-
AV1 video codec gains broader hardware support
Microsoft Edge does support AV1, but weirdly only through a Microsoft Store extension [1], even though Chrome has support built-in. This actually really sucks because in practice hardly any normal consumers would bother to install a strangely named extension, and so web developers have to assume it's largely unsupported in Edge. Safari ties support to a hardware decoder, which I suppose is understandable to avoid accidental battery drain from using a software codec, and means eventually in some year's time support can generally be relied upon when enough new hardware is in use. But that won't happen with Edge as things stand!
I think it's high time the web had a single audio and video codec choice that was widely supported, which is why I've proposed support for AV1 and Opus for the Interop 2024 effort [2] [3].
[1] https://apps.microsoft.com/detail/av1-video-extension/9MVZQV...
[2] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/485
[3] https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/484
-
Adobe proposes JPEG XL for interop web platform tests
This is the comment to read:
https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/430#iss...
It got me drooling for JPEG XL like I never did for WebP or HEIC.
- JPEG XL Proposed for Interop 2024
-
InterOp - what can we actually expect this year?
The Interop group describe this focus area as: "enable testing for font stack capabilities and enable additional expressiveness with vector color fonts. (Font feature detection and palettes)".
-
What new CSS and JavaScript features can we expect soon? Or is it all unexpected?
I would say that overall InterOp 2022 went well, they completed most of what they planned to do. Of the 15 focus areas, 13 focus areas had an InterOp score of over 80%.
-
Improvements that CSS could use in 2023
Interop 2023 is under development, the project timeline states that a public announcement will be made this week. 🤞
-
Pluralistic: Web apps could de-monopolize mobile devices (13 Dec 2022)
https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#ios-saf...
And
https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#evidenc...
Make sure you tap more comments to see the examples.
The number one issue for building native like apps is this https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/84
It has been buggy for as long as I can remember and never been fixed.
Not to mention the 10 years of issues with indexeddb or the issues with WebRTC.
-
Apple's claim is that it bans other browsers for security
Open Web Advocacy has been very clear that they want competition on iOS, not Chrome specifically. The reason being that the absence of competition is currently allowing Apple to deteriorate the web experience on iOS, preventing the web and web apps from competing with native apps. Their objective is to lift these artificial limitations imposed by Apple and free the web.
OWA members have actually been actively reporting WebKit bugs and interacting with the Safari team to help prioritise features and bug fixes on Twitter and elsewhere, showing the goal is to improve the overall web experience on iOS, not let Chrome to become dominant. Here is one of their detailed bug report: https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop-2022/issues/84.
-
Apple Is Not Defending Browser Engine Choice
Container Queries and Subgrid are only available in Safari Technology Preview, not stable, and Firefox has actually been supporting Subgrid for more than 2 years. Because CQ is not supported by either Chrome of Firefox, it will be at least 2 years before we can start actually using it.
It would have been much wiser for Safari to catch up on the dozens of features they don't support that both Chrome and Firefox do, or to focus on bug fixes for the most basic features that's been broken for years. Instead, they chose to ship shiny new ones to try and convince both regulators (from the EU, UK, US, etc) and web developers that they are leading the way in feature adoption. Unfortunately this seems to be working to some extent in the web devs community. Regulators are unlikely to fall for it though.
Here is the 7 years old scrolling bug I'm referring to, which prevents any decent implementation of modals in Safari on iOS: https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop-2022/issues/84
Here you can see that Safari has 5 times more API failures (representative of both missing features and bugs) than Chrome, and 3 times more than Firefox: https://wpt.fyi/
wpt
-
Show HN: Dropflow, a CSS layout engine for node or <canvas>
To reply mostly with my WPT Core Team hat off, mostly summarising the history of how we've ended up here:
A build script used by significant swaths of the test suite is almost certainly out; it turns out people like being able to edit the tests they're actually running. (We _do_ have some build scripts — but they're mostly just mechanically generating lots of similar tests.
A lot of the goal of WPT (and the HTML Test Suite, which it effectively grew out of) has been to have a test suite that browsers are actually running in CI: historically, most standards test suites haven't been particularly amenable to automation (often a lot of, or exclusively, manual tests, little concern for flakiness, etc.), and with a lot of policy choices that effectively made browser vendors choose to write tests for themselves and not add new tests to the shared test suite: if you make it notably harder to write tests for the shared test suite, most engineers at a given vendor are simply going to not bother.
As such, there's a lot of hesitancy towards anything that regresses the developer experience for browser engineers (and realistically, browser engineers, by virtue of sheer number, are the ones who are writing the most tests for web technologies).
That said, there are probably ways we could make things better: a decent number of tests for things like Grid use check-layout-th.js (e.g., https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/blob/f763dd7d7b7ed...).
One could definitely imagine a world in which these are a test type of their own, and the test logic (in check-layout-th.js) can be rewritten in a custom test harness to do the same comparisons in an implementation without any JS support.
The other challenge for things like Taffy only targeting flexbox and grid is we're unlikely to add any easy way to distinguish tests which are testing interactions with other layout features (`position: absolute` comes to mind!).
My suggestion would probably be to start with an issue at https://github.com/web-platform-tests/rfcs/issues, describing the rough constraints, and potentially with one or two possible solutions.
-
The Ladybird Browser Project
It also helps that there are tests
https://web-platform-tests.org/
-
Making Web Component properties behave closer to the platform
You can see how Mozilla tests the compliance of their built-in elements in the Gecko repository (the ok and is assertions are defined in their SimpleTest testing framework). And here's the Web Platform Tests' reflection harness, with data for each built-in element in sibling files, that almost every browser pass.
-
We're building a browser when it's supposed to be impossible
We have our own test suite (orginally derived from the test suite of Meta's Yoga layout library [0]) which consists of text fixtures that are small HTML snippets [1] and a test harness [2] that turns those into runnable tests, utilising headless chrome both to parse the HTML and to generate the assertions based on the layout that Chrome renders (so we are effectively comparing our implementation against Chrome). We currently have 686 generated tests (covering both Flexbox and CSS Grid).
We would like to utilise the Web Platform Test suite [3], however these are not in a standard format and many of the tests require JavaScript so we are not currently able to do that.
[0]: https://github.com/facebook/yoga
[1]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy/tree/main/test_fixtures
[2]: https://github.com/DioxusLabs/taffy/tree/main/scripts/gentes...
[3]: https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/css/cs...
-
What new CSS and JavaScript features can we expect soon? Or is it all unexpected?
The metrics are based on the passing rate for the web-platform-tests (WPT) project, the automated test suite for web standards. The completion rate is categorised as either stable, or experimental. There is no definition of what experimental entails, presumably features that are behind experimental flags are included. Stable is better to go off in any case.
-
[AskJS] MSE quality resources
Depends on what you are trying to achieve. You can run WPT MSE https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/media-source and WebCodecs https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/webcodecs tests manually to learn by doing.
-
Rookie question: How do I know I am making progress with my JS learning?
Manually running the tests in Web Platform Tests should keep you busy.
-
Browsers Running Old JS Engines
Not sure what you mean? I referred to Web API's, which generally means Web platform API's; that is Web platform API's tested by Web Platform Tests https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt.
-
State of CSS
If you want CSS to be the same across browsers then help implement CSS tests and file bugs
https://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/Test/Overview.en.html
https://web-platform-tests.org/
better specs are great, but tests will actually find the edge cases and lead to more convergence.
-
How do I go about learning advanced DOM manipulation with vanilla JS?
Run all these tests locally https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/tree/master/dom.
What are some alternatives?
totally-not-spyware - webkit; but pwned
browsh - A fully-modern text-based browser, rendering to TTY and browsers
UrlChecker - Android app by TrianguloY: URLCheck
firefox-ios - Firefox for iOS
construct-stylesheets - API for constructing CSS stylesheet objects
linkedom - A triple-linked lists based DOM implementation.
standards-positions - WebKit's positions on emerging web specifications
caniuse - Raw browser/feature support data from caniuse.com
uBlock-Safari - uBlock Origin - An efficient blocker for Chromium, Firefox, and Safari. Fast and lean.
firefox-user.js-tool - Interactive view, compare, and more for Firefox user.js (eg arkenfox/user.js) + about:config functions
postcss-nesting - Nest style rules inside each other
ioccc - My IOCCC submissions and practice.