CSS modules have been led by our friends at MSFT -- in fact, they're part of a package of module-like-things they've been pushing forward. Initial plan was to start with HTML modules as a replacement for Imports...but in standards conversation, went with less risky types first
So, instead, we do everything we can in the open...and "open" != "in a meeting of a chartered working group" So you get to see the sausage being made *because we need your help to improve it*
-
-
I could reduce our costs in shipping APIs by having us "pull an Apple" -- droppping stuff into the product fait-accomplis, then spending our standards energy arguing against deviations to what's shipped. You'd have less of a voice in that model. Is that better?
-
(in case it isn't clear, this is an honest question; we engage in public for more of the process because Google funds our team at a level that's more in line with what a vibrant web needs, while other vendors don't, and being out of line is uncomfortable for us too)
- 7 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.