Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: chromestatus.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to chromestatus.com.

Comments · 8

  1. Re:we believe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative · on Google Denies Altering YouTube Code To Break Microsoft Edge (theverge.com)

    Well, it certainly was either incompetence or malice. Google were (actually are) using a non-standard "Shadow DOM v0" model that was only implemented in the Google Chrome browser. On non-chrome, a "polyfill" or pure javascript implementation of that DOM engine was used instead.

    And it's not just Microsoft that are complaining here.

    That's right, all you anti-microsoft blinkered people out there, Mozilla has the same complaint about Google.

    YouTube basically uses an experimental version ("v0") of the shadow DOM API that is officially oboslete before it really got any traction (it's been superceeded by other versions). It was so obsolete that only Chrome implements. it is officially "depcreated" by Google, but we'll see what happens in April 2019.

  2. Re:We neec to get Chrome away from Google by butchersong · · Score: 1 · on Google Has Made YouTube Slower on Edge and Firefox, Mozilla Alleges (neowin.net)

    I thought firefox supported this behind the "dom.webcomponents.shadowdom.enabled" flag but the bigger question is why Youtube chose v0 rather than v1 that everyone is working to support. Chrome itself has deprecated v0: https://www.chromestatus.com/f...

  3. Re:Shadow DOM is a W3C standard by POWRSURG · · Score: 4, Informative · on Google Has Made YouTube Slower on Edge and Firefox, Mozilla Alleges (neowin.net)

    The point of mentioning version 0 is because every major browser that is working on Shadow DOM is developing towards version 1. The v0 implementation was more experimental that made its way out there because Google doesn't always go through the proper standards practice. Version 1 is actually going through the normal standardization process. Firefox and Safari have the version 1 code in development, while Edge has it marked as a high priority consideration.

    To be clear, Chrome deprecated v0 in April 2018 and will remove in 2019. If Google does nothing than Chrome will slow down on YouTube as it will have the same issues Firefox and Edge currently are feeling.

  4. Re:Shadow DOM is a W3C standard by ichimunki · · Score: 4, Informative · on Google Has Made YouTube Slower on Edge and Firefox, Mozilla Alleges (neowin.net)

    They throw "v1" in there because "v0" is deprecated and the version of Polymer that Google is using on YouTube uses v0. https://www.chromestatus.com/f...

  5. Re:Shadow DOM is a W3C standard by ichimunki · · Score: 3, Informative · on Google Has Made YouTube Slower on Edge and Firefox, Mozilla Alleges (neowin.net)

    No one said Shadow DOM is deprecated. The point is that Polymer 1.0, which is being used on YouTube uses on Shadow DOM v0, which is deprecated. They could update their version of Polymer to 2.0 or higher and rely instead on Shadow DOM v1, which is not deprecated. https://www.chromestatus.com/f...

  6. Re:There is no 68 version! (yet) by mykepredko · · Score: 1 · on In Encryption Push, Chrome Flags HTTP Sites as 'Not Secure' (zdnet.com)

    Here is the release information - https://www.chromestatus.com/f...

    I'm guessing it won't be released until later today (11:59PM UTC)?

  7. Re:Firefox removes a CA while Google removes PKP by viperidaenz · · Score: 1 · on Mozilla Might Distrust Dutch Government Certs Over 'False Keys' (bleepingcomputer.com)

    Supported by Blink and enabled by default in Chrome 61 and Opera 48. Mozilla has publicly voiced their support for it and are currently developing support for it.
    https://www.chromestatus.com/f...

    It stops any CA from mis-issuing a certificate without first publicly declaring so. They have to submit their certificate to a public log before they use it. They can't remove it from the log.

  8. Some more usefull info by Reemi · · Score: 1 · on Chrome 43 Should Help Batten Down HTTPS Sites

    From https://www.chromestatus.com/f...:
    This feature allows authors to ask the user agent to transparently upgrade HTTP resources to HTTPS to ease the migration burden.

    So it is the content provider which decides if this is being used.

    It is not only a Google thing, check the Firefox bugzilla:
    https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s...

    And the W3C Draft:
    https://w3c.github.io/webappse...

    This is in my opinion a good thing, it leaves all control in the hands of the content provider and supports the move to encryption everywhere.