web-bugs VS standards-positions

The thread is very long, here is the relevant comment:

https://github.com/webcompat/web-bugs/issues/131916#issuecom...

https://github.com/webcompat/web-bugs/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%...

Microsoft Teams (which I don't think many people use voluntarily) in particular breaks in stupid ways - and then in others if you spoof your user agent.

a link to the video would help with troubleshooting, seems like another case of "this site or this particular feature doesn't support firefox" otherwise report to https://webcompat.com/

Have any of you faced this? If the website is made to open only in chromium-based browsers, I am planning to report to Webcompat. But before that, I thought I would make sure from others. Any experience or quick fix would be appreciated.

Teams was a classic hellhole for me when I was using Linux. Nowadays it lets you in but Firefox genuinely doesn't support all of the features the Teams site uses. This means certain features are made unavailable to Firefox users. Forcing the user agent makes some of these partially work but they are also still broken so Mozilla doesn't want to enable a user agent override by default and Microsoft doesn't want to enable a feature that only half works.

This GitHub WebCompat issue serves as a good example history https://github.com/webcompat/web-bugs/issues/77892

https://github.com/webcompat/web-bugs/issues/125920#issuecom...

having recently looked at a firefox performance regression for filing a bugreport, tooling that tracks performance (quite publicly) sees attention, easy upload to share tracing profiles also helps: https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/testing/perfdocs/ind...

Their dedicated blog keeps you posted if firefox perf is your interest https://blog.mozilla.org/performance/

If you have a particular website you notice chromium being significantly faster with, for an easy report, there's https://webcompat.com/ - though bugzilla is better than it seems when coming from github issues

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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...

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 are dragging their heels on @scope:

https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/472

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/implement-css-scope-rul...

Someone who clearly didn't get it was wasting three years time "well actually"ing everything. The latest news is "it's worth prototyping". Meanwhile Chrome has released it(steam rolled?) and Safari has it in tech preview.

I question if FireFox has the resources to keep up with the pace of the modern web.