10 ms·
Ironically, that text is all you get if you load the site from a text browser (Lynx etc.) It doesn't feel too different from <noscript>This website requires Ja
by shiomiru 10mo ago
Ironically, that text is all you get if you load the site from a text browser (Lynx etc.) It doesn't feel too different from <noscript>This website requires JavaScript</noscript>...
I now wonder if XSLT is implemented by any browser that isn't controlled by Google (or derived from one that is).
- auscompgeek 10mo agoFirefox haven't removed XSLT support yet.
- shiomiru 10mo agoI should've worded differently. By the narrative of this website, Google is "paying" Mozilla & Apple to remove XSLT, thus they are "controlled" by Google. I personally don't quite believe it's all that black and white, just wanted to point out that the "open web" argument is questionable even if you accept this premise.
- ahoka 10mo agoIt’s a joke.
- shevy-java 10mo agoThe problem is that the web is no longer really "open". Google kind of controls most of it right now. Just look at all the admoney influx.
- mimasama 10mo agoPale Moon still has XSLT support and has no plans to remove it: https://outerheaven.club/notice/AxFlFCfzzgRRpvubVw https://outerheaven.club/notice/AxFlFCfzzgRRpvubVw
- le-mark 10mo ago> now wonder if XSLT is implemented by any browser that isn't controlled by Google (or derived from one that is). Edge IE 11 mode is still there for you. Which also supports IE 6+ like it always did, presumably. They didn’t reimplement IE in Edge; IE is still there. Microsoft was all in on xml technologies back in the day.
- meindnoch 10mo agoOpera.
- StilesCrisis 10mo agoThe page works fine in Mobile Safari.
- layer8 10mo agoI suspect that it wouldn't actually be that difficult to add XSLT support to a textmode browser, given that XSLT libraries exist and that XSLT in the browser is a straightforward application of it. They just haven't bothered with it.