Comment by Klonoar

Setting aside the discussion of the linked issue itself (tone, comments, etc), I feel like I need to throw this out there:

I don't understand the point in having a JS polyfill and then expecting websites to include it if they want to use XSLT stuff. The beauty of the web is that shit mostly just works going back decades, and it's led to all kinds of cool and useful bits of information transfer. I would bet money that so much of the weird useful XSLT stuff isn't maintained as much today - and that doesn't mean it's not content worth keeping/preserving.

This entire issue feels like it would be a nothing-burger if browser vendors would just shove the polyfill into the browser and auto-run it on pages that previously triggered the fear-inducing C++ code paths.

What exactly is the opposition to this? Even reading the linked issue, I don't see an argument against this that makes much sense. It solves every problem the browser vendors are complaining about and nothing functionally changes for end users.