logoalt Hacker News

danielheathyesterday at 7:10 AM3 repliesview on HN

Today, I can save a PNG file off a random website and then open it.

If PNG gets extended, it's entirely plausible that someone will view a PNG in their browser, save it, and then not be able to open the file they just saved.

There are those who claim "backwards compatibility" doesn't cover "how you use it" - but roughly none of the people who now have to deal with broken software care about such semantic arguments. It used to work, and now it doesn't.


Replies

fc417fc802yesterday at 7:49 AM

The alternative is the website operator who wants to save on bandwidth instead adopts JXL or WEBP or what have you and ... the end user with old software still can't open it.

It's a dichotomy. Either the provider accommodates users with older software or not. The file extension or internal headers don't change that reality.

Another example, new versions of PDF can adopt all the bells and whistles in the world but I will still be saving anything intended to be long lived as 1/a which means I don't get to use any of those features.

mrheosuperyesterday at 7:42 AM

which is what usb-c spec has been avoiding so far. Even in USB4 spec, there are a lot of mentioning the new spec should be compatible with TB3 devices.

USB-C spec is anything but breaking backward compatible.

johnisgoodyesterday at 7:14 AM

This is what I fear, too.

Do they mention which C libraries use this spec?