Sometimes we get things wrong! But as often as not these days, we just can't get feedback from other vendors in a timely way. It's a direct consequence of them starving their platform teams of staff.
-
-
But the big question here is this: why are *browser vendors* in charge of web standards, as opposed to a faction within a larger group of stakeholders (a la TC39, though ideally without the same financial commitments) that can advise on implementation pitfalls?
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
I wrote a blog post series on some of this: https://infrequently.org/2018/06/effective-standards-work-part-1-the-lay-of-the-land/ … https://infrequently.org/2018/06/effective-standards-work-part-2-threading-the-needle/ … TL;DR: feature development and standardisation are separate-but-related processes, and the folks who ship the bits take the risks.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @Rich_Harris and
What this means, in practice, is that doing good feature development requires collaboration and iteration. And it means being able to effect change in important codebases. So we need to iterate in those codebases when doing feature development.
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
currently reading those two posts, but to me this sounds like the tail wagging the dog
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Imagine trading places with a browser engineer. A standards body stamps a clearly problematic design with their seal of approval. Neither you nor any of your engine builder peers think it's a good idea. Does it get implemented, particularly when doing so means taking a risk?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @Rich_Harris and
All good design work -- the stuff that gets to eventual interop and which folks don't hate -- is the result of a collaboration between platform developers and web developers. One party calling the shots never works, and putting standards before design iteration doesn't either.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I'm sure the browser engineers would hate it, just as companies often hate adhering to regulations and laws dreamt up by governments and lawmakers. The answer in both cases is for the rule-setters to take the advice given by industry seriously, without ceding power to it
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
It doesn't seem we're talking about the same things.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Evidently! I'm talking about a more ideal balance of power within the standards process, you're using a hypothetical bad standard (which a good process ought to prevent) to argue in defense of the one that actually evolved
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Again, feature design and standards are not the same thing. Confusing them is the cause of more suffering than I can quickly recount.
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.