"Github no longer supports this web browser."
Gitlab loops you on a "checking your browser" web page.
Good job, W3C.
Welcome back to days of Internet Explorer, but there are three Internet Explorers: the one Google makes, the one Google feeds, and the one Google stole which was in turn stolen from KDE.
If you don't use one of these, whether your browser can support standards is of no substance.
Web is like those public toilets which you look at then go, "I'd rather go into the woods.".
At least, back in the day, the divide between IE and others was a functional divide: IE had one set of functions, sometimes useful, and the others didn't/couldn't.
Now, it's basically having the wrong user agent string or fingerprint. There's no big difference between Firefox 57, Chrome from 2 years ago, or Safari, Edge, or whatever, apart from version numbers, with regards to rendering standards compliant web pages.
A great deal of this mess comes from the drive to use the Web browser as a "platform" for applications ― in effect, an operating system, rather than a document viewer. (I'm sure I've said this before.) The most positive thing I can say about this is that it strikes me as a truly boneheaded approach to the problem of cross-platform compatibility!
@publius The saddest part of it in my case is that I was on the bandwagon for a long time, after when this shitshow started early 2010s. In hindsight, there were a lot of clues, and more should've seen that it wouldn't end with a couple fancy "semantic tags" and some CSS QoL.
More globally sad part is, all this stuff is unused. Notifications? Only for spam. Websockets? Mostly for spyware. <canvas? Spyware. CSS3? Who doesn't use Sass/Less/...? HTML5? Everything's in JSX now.
@be When cars became a commodity they started to shape our cities. Pedestrians were defenseless meatballs so they had to comply. Soon enough we started building entire cities around cars, esp. in North America, such that not having one meant you couldn't fetch your basic needs even. A more detailed history of this is available in videos of City Beautiful and Not Just Bikes on YouTube, tho surely there would be books that go way more in depth. In any case, now we're
@publius As someone who used them a lot esp. during my undergrad in Istanbul, my observation is they have their upsides and downsides. They have to mix in with the all the traffic at least sometimes which can slow them down a lot. But they are way smoother to ride compared to buses, and of course greener and way more silent. And from my experience in Eskişehir, they are a great fit for small <1mln cities, where a metro network would be an overkill.
Streetcars are also exceedingly useful for peripheral circulation in large metropolitan areas. Basically, an underground is most suitable for the most heavily built-up areas, but you can then carry a lot of traffic on streetcar lines which serve medium density areas around or on the fringes of the subway area. Munich & Toronto both do this effectively (although more lines are desperately needed in both cities).
Helsinki is another place which co-ordinates streetcars with subways. Also the northernmost subway in the world, which I have ridden ― by apparently about 50 km compared to that of Petrograd! Not, however, the most northerly electric street railway, which is elsewhere in Finland, & which I have not ridden.
basically, the cost of a subway and the optimal ridership is so high that in many cases, street-level transit like light rail/trams/streetcars is better.
wrt toronto, our city is on a grid layout and the main subway lines are north-south and east-west, so it is easy for streetcar and bus routes to feed into the subway lines.
"I appreciate SDF but it's a general-purpose server and the name doesn't make it obvious that it's about art." - Eugen Rochko