Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Touche 2596 days ago
I don't understand the cynicism people have for this idea. All they did was say "wouldn't it be cool if you could have nice animations in between pages" and built a proof-of-concept. It's not a finished product. They aren't forcing it into a standard. It's a demo of something that would be cool.

So why the heck are people opposed to that?
3 comments
vernie 2596 days ago
Well you certainly can't raise a stink after it's in the standard.
link
Touche 2596 days ago
My point is, portal isn't "an iframe without all the security protections." portal is a demo of animating between pages. What it becomes from there is completely flexible.
link
skymt 2596 days ago
Animation isn't the point of the portal element, it's to allow cross-site navigation to an embedded page without reloading.
link
bzbarsky 2596 days ago
Things are not "flexible" once they have been shipped on by default, typically. Changing behavior or removing at that point becomes very hard, requiring usage measurements, etc.
link
Touche 2596 days ago
This is not on by default.
link
bzbarsky 2595 days ago
Yes, I am aware. But that's related to how happy Google is with it, not to whether it's standardized in any way.
link
amiga-workbench 2596 days ago
IE5 has proprietary page transition animations, works pretty nicely actually.

https://people.apache.org/~jim/NewArchitect/webrevu/1998/12_...

link
andrekandre 2596 days ago
when you are google, unilaterally releasing and pushing a major new feature for “the web” has an entirely different meaning and implication to it compared to, sadly, mozilla, or some other player (even apple to some extent) because of their huge market/mind share.

in that scenario “wouldn’t it be cool” is not a good enough reason, and for a major feature such as this, skepticism is healthy and warranted... the “web browser” is slowly being transformed into “the google browser” and we have no one to blame but ourselves

link
Touche 2593 days ago
The consensus opinion seems to be, from this thread and elsewhere, "While Google is not doing anything wrong by standards in this case, because they have the power/potential to do something wrong by standards we must oppose this as well."
link