This is the start of the standards process. Intent to implement does not mean intent to ship, only that an engineer want to start writing some code. It's the public signal that the team is interested enough in this idea to prototype into the Chromium codebase, but it will be behind a flag.

The standardization process will undoubtedly change the shape of the thing altogether, or it could not even make it into the HTML spec.

One engineer shared the idea yesterday [1] of introducing a new element in Chrome behind an experiment flag to play with and you are mortified that Mozilla, Microsoft and Apple haven't responded with an official position within 24h?

[1] https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!msg/blink...

Public signal from Firefox: https://twitter.com/jensimmons/status/1138980859728531456

The new reality, what people were talking about for a while now. Google owns the web now, they do whatever they want with it - and what they want is primarily improving their advertising revenue.

Every time I mention that Chrome is the new IE, people on HN keep saying that it is not true because IE was bad and Chrome is good.

Have these people and the google developers behind Chrome considerd that maybe they are the baddies?

It was frequently said that /at the time of release/ ie6 was better and more standards compliant than the other web browsers. Then it was left to rot for years.

Perhaps notably, it was actually faster and had lower memory usage than Firefox for a while (Firefox had many leaks). The issues were security, standards and NO TABS!

... Honestly if MS hadn't been so unbelievably deaf to users and web developers, Firefox and Chrome may have never succeeded. If Google doesn't completely screw up, Chrome won't go the way of IE. Maybe messing with adblockers qualifies?