Open Standards aren't about posting a publicly-readable spec. They're about getting critiques and and consensus from an open community of stakeholders (including multiple implementers).https://twitter.com/AmeliasBrain/status/1126235639270088704 …
There is no immaculate conception for web APIs. The explainer is a request for collaboration and you can shape the future of the API by engaging on GH or OT. What is objectionable about that?
-
-
Lemmie try another way to describe what's going on here: Some customers (folks working on a heavily used framework) talked about a problem they had with receptive platform engineers. Together they sketched out a straw-person API...
-
...then, they made the a doc to explain the problem and one possible solution and published it, asking for feedback is any constructive sort. Why? Because they could be wrong! It might not actually be the core problem (but rather, adjacent). It could also be the wrong design.
- 19 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The objectionable part is that collaboration isn't happening on GH.
-
Yes it is! Or rather, once the sketch was published, GH is where the action is.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.