When you open sites on other "new" browser engines you typically get a really butchered visual result, with layouts completely broken, elements missing, wrong colors, etc. For example, Servo didn't support floats until recently, and IIRC even simple sites like Hacker News look "wrong".

Ladybird's approach has been to start with a somewhat naive implementation of features, then choose popular websites and apps and just continuously iterate to make them gradually look better, by fixing the parts that stand out. This pragmatic approach means that their supported feature set, while nowhere near 100%, can decently render 90% of websites due to being aligned with the most commonly used features.

I can't relate / do not recognise these claims of incorrect rendering; is there a resource out there that shows images of how it's supposed to be vs what it looks like? I thought this was a problem of the past, IE compatibility with web standards kind of thing.

Which browser are you talking about that renders everything correctly? Are you using a Servo-based browser? Is there even a Servo-based browser that someone can easily download and use?

Servo themselves say they only pass 55.8% of tests[1]. This thread[2] says Servo doesn't support SVG[2] as of Nov 2022.

[1] https://wpt.servo.org/

[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/browsers/comments/z2d7pr/servo_base...

just download a no-name browser and see for yourself

For example, here's the BBC homepage in Firefox, Servo, Ladybird, and NetSurf: https://i.imgur.com/kCReCPd.png

Here's Wikipedia: https://i.imgur.com/IshNWU2.png

Ladybird implements far more web technologies than more well-funded, longer-running alternative browser projects.

> I thought this was a problem of the past, IE compatibility with web standards kind of thing.

For the mainstream browser engines, yes, but if you're starting a browser from scratch the amount of stuff you have to implement is massive and cannot be implemented in the span of even a couple of years.