So how did our now-ancient groups come to be? Like mighty redwoods, they also grew from seeds. Every big, important WG was launched by an upstart idea that slowly, slowly gained traction.
-
Show this thread
-
...and here's the dirty secret: that earliest, most intense and furious iteration *didn't happen inside a chartered WG*!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
There's a material difference between road building and volcanic erruptions. Both move a bit of soil around, but they aren't remotely similar in their pace or intensity.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
"major" WGs get formed at SDOs by folks who generally all have implemented something that maybe even is partially interoperable and want a forum to protect what's working and sand off the sharp bits.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
The path is always: DESIGN → ITERATE → SHIP & STANDARDISE
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
I get into some of it at length here: https://infrequently.org/2018/06/effective-standards-work-part-2-threading-the-needle/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
The important thing to recall is that the earliest work that led to the core of what our major WGs tend *didn't happen in committee either* So why would we expect new things to be different?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
And yet we do. Insiders are always keen for work to happen in the rooms they're already in (where they have implicit veto and social capital from previous battles won/lost). For early stage exploration, this is a trap!
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
The insiders don't feel the glacial rate of progress as a problem...they're too busy as it is! And folks presenting upstart ideas didn't convince all the old-timers that their thing was really *needed*...we've gotten by without it, after all! And we work by consensus here, soo...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
These forums are toxic for exploration and iteration of big new things because *that's not what they're chartered to do*. Never were, never will be (see previous thread).
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread
In conclusion, WGs that tend to the care and feeding of important systems didn't spring fully formed from the head of Zeus either! It's unreasonable to expect such miracles to happen at *any* moment, past or future, so we use CGs and incubation to make safer spaces for new ideas.
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate
Guessing these threads are precipitated by <toast>… It’s good for folks to understand how various groups work. However, reaction to <toast> is pretty telling & widespread. IMO Google needs to message its exploration better, and folks don’t need to know about this as much.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jfbastien
I've been thinking a lot about how other vendors tend not to implement early, and generally don't have the bandwidth to explore (structurally under-funding their web platform teams), so i2i looks late-stage because for them it *would* be.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 2 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.