Is it common for proposed specs to have origin trials in Chrome even before they move to WICG?
-
-
-
Replying to @tabatkins @dauwhe
I *think* I would complain about an origin trial for something that wasn't in at least the WICG. Folks trying to give feedback ought to have a solid IP situation for that feedback. We don't have a process to catch that mistake though.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Origin Trials are for experimentation. The feedback we (Google) get from them, and the rights to that feedback, are separable from standards body participation and licenses. That is, Google runs whatever risks it runs from taking whatever inputs it takes, CG or not.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slightlylate @jyasskin and
More concretely, is there some other concern with things not in WICG going to OT? I can think of many reasons why that might happen (another CG, non-W3C development process, etc.)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The other-CG/other standards body aspect was why I wrote "at least". I'm worried about things that are only in personal repos or Docs.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
I'm only as worried as they are mature.
-
-
If they're mature, it's a low bar to get them into the WICG, so I think we should do it.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.