I hadn’t heard that response. For me, it’s been the opposite: if a feature is Baseline, then it’s good to go. A bit less granular than caniuse, and an easy distinction to understand.
Replies
The specific concern I've heard is that adding Baseline labels to blog posts and reference documentation will scare people off from using "limited availability" features, even if those features can easily be used as progressive enhancements now...
aug 13, 2025, 4:34 pm • 1 0 • view
Is that like… a real thing that has happened? Or something that someone is (perhaps needlessly) worried about? IMO having a “baseline 2025” label is a good way to keep stragglers tethered to somewhat current availability. TLDR: baseline is good. I’m team baseline.
aug 13, 2025, 6:58 pm • 1 0 • view
Totally agree. I'm not aware that it's a thing that has ever actually happened (though admittedly it would be hard to know if it did). But it's definitely something people are concerned could happen. Here's one example (and I've heard others express similar concerns): bsky.app/profile/zach...
aug 13, 2025, 7:48 pm • 1 0 • view
(was on vacation) but I agree that Baseline is a net positive! There is room for improvement on it too, imo
aug 19, 2025, 5:41 pm • 3 0 • view
But IMO anyone who understands how to use progressive enhancement is likely not going to be confused or dissuaded by Baseline labels. The primary audience for Baseline labels are people that *don't* fully understand progressive enhancement and aren't actively looking to try out new features.
aug 13, 2025, 4:34 pm • 0 0 • view