Implement != ship. It's really unclear to me what's the problem with that timeline
-
-
Replying to @yoavweiss
Complete lack of interest in or solicitation of the perspectives, plans, or design input of other vendors (nevermind the wider Web community).
1 reply 0 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @fantasai @yoavweiss
How does requesting an early design review from TAG not constitute exactly that?
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @RickByers @yoavweiss
1. The TAG is overloaded, and only has one engineer from each vendor. It's an important review, but doesn't have the same broadness of participation or specialization as proposing things through more specific standardization channels.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
2. The ITI template (afaik) is intended for proving/indexing that discussion, not starting it. Because it makes sense to get initial design review and other key input as to whether or not this is a good idea *before* you start implementing it.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
If the ITI template is intended to *start* soliciting input, you may want to seriously redesign it, because as mentioned elsewhere in the thread it's interpreted by everyone else as the title says: an intent to implement the thing described. Not as a request for comments.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Follow-up on the "the TAG is overloaded" point... if problems with a proposal can be caught by people other than the TAG before it gets to the TAG, that helps the TAG do its job better by improving its throughput and letting it focus on what other groups can't provide.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @fantasai @RickByers
Sure. And I don't think that the TAG review issues are reserved for TAG members. But because the TAG is overloaded, review latency can be high. So starting it early gives everyone enough time to look at it before the folks pushing the feature think it should actually ship
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I also don't understand the core argument here; is it *bad* to be seeking broad feedback? Is it bad to be building implementations to learn from and iterate on? Which part of this is mis-ordered?
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
According to your own I2I documentation, posting an I2I before discussing the feature with other vendors / in relevant standards bodies: https://gist.github.com/dauwhe/065b0c2b4ffae7b00e103e63edab25b9 … According to the WHATWG guidelines, developing your solution before even posting the problem: https://whatwg.org/faq#adding-new-features …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
WHATWG isn't an incubation forum and we don't use it that way.
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate @fantasai and
Steps 1-7 are essentially incubation. Many features have been incubated at the WHATWG (e.g. <script type=module>), but incubation can happen anywhere. I suppose the focus has shifted lately to do less incubation at the WHATWG, but the FAQ entry isn't so much about venue.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.