Editorial: Plugins are no longer an extensibility mechanism #6867
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As reported by dg12 on Matrix, with Flash no longer being supported, it shouldn't be listed as an example of the use of plugins. Furthermore, since whatwg#6003 aims to remove any complexity around plugins except for that which is needed for PDF viewers, it is clear that plugins in general are no longer an extensibility mechanism.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As reported by dg12 on Matrix, with Flash no longer being supported, it shouldn't be listed as an example of the use of plugins. Furthermore, since #6003 aims to remove any complexity around plugins except for that which is needed for PDF viewers, it is clear that plugins in general are no longer an extensibility mechanism.
Should I add dg12 to the acknowledgements for reporting this?
/introduction.html ( diff )