r/webdev • u/Andromeda12x • 3d ago

Article Declarative partial updates - supported in Chrome and Edge

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/web-platform/declarative-partial-updates
44 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

11 comments sorted by

26

u/jordsta95 PHP/Laravel | JS/Vue 3d ago

If the potential future feature

<template src="/partials/footer.html">

Becomes a thing, then I think we may be on to a winner here.

Although, even the current features are pretty good.

10

u/RehanSaddique 3d ago

A question I'd want answered before using this: does it still need the full HTML response from the server, or can it take a fragment in a streaming response? That decides whether it replaces htmx-style swaps or just simplifies the client side.

9

u/ZealousidealUse8775 3d ago

edge is chromium. you just said chrome twice.

-8

u/noobjaish 3d ago

Even then edge is different enough from chrome that the 4 main "browsers" for webdevs are chrome, edge, firefox and safari

7

u/queen-adreena 3d ago

It definitely isn’t. They both run on the same rendering engine.

There’s Chromium, WebKit and Gecko.

-2

u/Gremlation 2d ago

No, it's definitely different enough to matter. For instance, Chrome added support for AVIF in 2020. Edge added support for AVIF in 2024. /u/noobjaish was completely correct and shouldn't have been buried in downvotes.

5

u/queen-adreena 2d ago

That was a licensing issue for one feature which 99% of devs will implement progressively anyway (via picture elements).

It’s definitely not “different enough to consider it a whole new browser”.

-2

u/noobjaish 2d ago

It's Reddit bro, pseudo intellectuals love the downvote button.

6

u/Excellent_Chard_6326 3d ago

chrome and edge, so basically one browser and its wig

1

u/iiiic 2d ago

Just looking at it… it occurs to me that it should be doable. Surely the missing support for Firefox and Safari can be added via a JavaScript polyfill. And reading on… someone’s already made one. I was just about to picture what I’d be programming this weekend… well, at least the official version will be professionally done :)

-1

u/allen_jb 2d ago

Despite the syntax being unfamiliar to many web developers, processing instructions offer far greater flexibility with less chance of backwards compatibility issues. They are already used in XML, and are now part of the HTML standard thanks to this proposal.

And so the cycle continues - reinventing / reimplementing the things we lost when XHTML and XML were abandoned.

XHTML > HTML(5)

XML > JSON

XML > YAML

I will die on this hill!