The downvotes are happening because this would have been as possible to achieve in Safari as in Chrome had the author chosen to develop purely in that, and Chrome would have been one of the engines that look broken. At this level you’re relying on engine quirks rather than spec compatibility.
Disagree. As someone who has tried to make web art that works cross-browser, I frequently follow standards and end up with something that works in Chrome, but breaks in Safari. I end up having to write hacks to detect Safari, cut out the parts of the standard they’ve implemented wrong, and find often crappy looking workarounds.
I’ve had issues with canvases just sort of “flashing” for no reason, and if you try to use SVG filters or other parts of the SVG standard that have been standardized for years... well Safari doesn’t choose to just ignore them. Instead it will sometimes just make the parts of the SVG affected by the filter turn black and then call it a day.
So I wouldn’t say that it’s as easy to create something that works fine in Safari and breaks in Chrome. Making something that works in Safari is just plain hard.
This; I've had issues with Safari when trying to create a smooth animation of multiple elements synced up to each other to create the illusion of them being one continuous looping element. Chrome, Firefox, and Edge had no problem keeping the elements synced together, but in Safari, the time-resolution of animation-delay was terrible, and it forced me to overlap the elements by quite a bit, making things a bit worse across all browsers.
Safari also basically destroyed my animation whenever the window size was changed, which also applies to switching from portrait to landscape on iOS.
Actually the downvotes are coming from people who don't have experience developing websites to support Safari.
>The downvotes are happening because this would have been as possible to achieve in Safari as in Chrome had the author chosen to develop purely in that, and Chrome would have been one of the engines that look broken.
This is not true.
>At this level you’re relying on engine quirks rather than spec compatibility.
I think you're misunderstanding - the art was developed with standards. Safari is the piece that is failing the standards, not the art.
