diff --git a/content/notes/re-trying-real-websites-in-the-serenityos-browser.md b/content/notes/re-trying-real-websites-in-the-serenityos-browser.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8efa473
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/notes/re-trying-real-websites-in-the-serenityos-browser.md
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+---
+title: "Re: trying real websites in the SerenityOS browser"
+date: 2022-07-08T14:53:39-07:00
+replyURI: "https://linus.dev/posts/trying-real-websites-in-the-serenityos-browser/"
+replyTitle: "Trying Real™ Websites in the SerenityOS Browser"
+replyType: "BlogPosting"
+replyAuthor: "Linus Groh"
+replyAuthorURI: "https://linus.dev/"
+---
+
+Most of these are pages that blur the line between "document" and "app", containing many interactive controls. Being concerned about them is valid; however, I think the concern is misplaced at this stage.
+
+*For an independent engine,* I'm more interested in simple "web documents". Those need to work well before tackling "Web 2.0" territory. Specifically: articles progressively enhanced with images, stylesheets, and maybe a script or two. Understanding how well Web 2.0 sites render isn't really useful to me without first understanding how well documents render.
+
+When testing my site, my main pain points are: a lack of support for `<details>`, misplaced `<figcaption>` elements, my SVG profile photo not rendering (it renders when I open it in a new tab), and occasional overlapping text. The only non-mainstream independent engine I know of that supports `<details>` is Servo.