I'm not ascribing poor intent. More like impatience and over-confidence. And not towards individuals, but to the system in which they operate
-
-
Replying to @Rich_Harris @graynorton and
Let's flip the question around: how long is too long to hold a feature?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slightlylate @graynorton and
depends whether its absence is preventing developers from doing their jobs
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Rich_Harris @slightlylate and
I appreciate the passion, but that's a pretty bad definition. I've actually heard a similar one by browser vendors as they point to the fact that webdevs can do it but those solutions at times have unfortunate end user implications (not saying that is true for SD specifically)...
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @gregwhitworth @Rich_Harris and
...to take both arguments to the extreme; JavaScript and the <canvas> element exist so we can all pack up and go home. I've said that numerous times to colleagues when talking about CSS color functions, CSS Grid, custom properties, new HTML elements & styling, etc.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gregwhitworth @Rich_Harris and
Ultimately, it's a fine line and I think as long as the folks are creating solutions, getting feedback and ensuring that they're building something people want to use - then I say carry on. IF that isn't happening then we're just creating bloat not only to the binaries but...
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gregwhitworth @Rich_Harris and
...also to webdev ramp up, our own engineers having to maintain the code for patches, etc. So it's in everyone's best interest to continue to collaborate :)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @gregwhitworth @slightlylate and
I get what you're saying, but whereas 'these features could be designed differently' is considered valid collaboration, 'these features are unnecessary' doesn't seem to be
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Rich_Harris @gregwhitworth and
Let's break this down. On one hand, could argue that there is an opportunity cost; that there's some other thing you wish these particular engineers had done instead of this feature. Can you identify it? On the other, classic non-rival goods. Perhaps not for you, but
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @Rich_Harris and
Put differently, folks building a system have heavy users who say "we have this problem", then work to solve it. If folks who *don't* have that problem say "WTF?", it seems incumbent on the latter population to present some argument as to why that *is* constructive.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Generalized detraction isn't contribution. Specific proposed alternatives are. What are those?
-
-
Replying to @slightlylate @gregwhitworth and
I wasn't talking about opportunity cost, I was talking about the fact that adding features *itself* has cost. Scroll up!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Rich_Harris @gregwhitworth and
Oh, I got that. Asking for specific alternatives. Do you have a rubric for importance that would pierce your threshold?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 11 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.