omg please break it for the sake of pushing perf, usability, dx in the right direction.
-
-
-
Exactly - needs to be a huge payoff, not just "clean up some old cruft in JS that old websites may still need"
@wycats -
that doesn't sound like it would be forced to break old content...
-
Cleaning up old cruft? By that I meant "fixing" things like typeof null == 'object' which bugs some ppl for some reason
@TheLarkInn -
I mean big improvements shouldn't have to break old content. At the limit, opt-in.
-
'use fast;'
-
it's really annoying when 3 year old dormant projects break and require active upkeep.
#bitrotsux
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
why don't <marquee> and <blink> work?
-
exceptions that prove the rule ;)
-
that's not what that means, btw https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule …
-
I think that, like "begging the question", we have to just give up on this one.
-
but in this case it's used to mean "Ahh yes but your evidence to the contrary somehow proves my point!"
-
nah I meant it in the original sense ;)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
still mad about passive handlers?
-
if only that was the only breakage that affected me personally I'd be a happy man.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
wow, I'm pretty surprised at the current results
-
as long as "break the web for chrome" doesn't win...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
break the web if it results in a significantly better web but allow opt-out through the use of meta tags or something like that
-
opt out or opt in?
-
my initial thoughts are opt out such that everyone gets better web by default. There are reasonable arguments for either side though
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.