I believe that at a minimum, Google deserves some good faith credit here for trying to lay out a whole vision for discussion. Think it could have been presented slightly better, but even if it didn't pan out, big props to @domenic and others for trying hard/starting conversations
-
-
Replying to @briankardell @fabricedesre and
In retrospect, the pushback against toast was a good sign that any attempts at rallying around standard high-level controls will not succeed. I'm doubtful anyone can overcome that kind of negativity e.g. for accordion.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @domenic @briankardell and
I think when you present something as well-researched as https://github.com/jackbsteinberg/std-toast/tree/master/study-group … and get https://adrianroselli.com/2019/06/scraping-burned-toast.html … in response, browser vendors are going to be very hesitant to invest any time in the controls listed in the OP of this thread.
7 replies 1 retweet 19 likes -
Replying to @domenic @briankardell and
And to think the drama involved in WC may have been the "easy" path
No responsible platform vendor asks their engineers to take lkml-levels of abuse.2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @domenic and
I think the wrong lesson may have been learned here. If “Intent to Prototype” naming had been in place from the beginning, I think toast would still be alive today. IMO, this really was 100% about ppl wrongly saying, “Google’s making toast without asking anybody else’s opinion!”
4 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @dfabu @slightlylate and
Also, why would "intent to *" ever precede a standards body level discussion? Very confused about that
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HarperMitchell @dfabu and
Even "intent to prototype" should have a reference to some standards body level discussion, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HarperMitchell @slightlylate and
No. Prototyping is “thinking” in practice. Experiment first, standardize second, every time.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @dfabu @slightlylate and
黒田 東彦 stan 🚫 🛬 5️⃣-gon Retweeted 黒田 東彦 stan 🚫 🛬 5️⃣-gon
I think you are misunderstanding my ask, I merely am suggesting that people be notified of intent to perform an experiment ahead of timehttps://twitter.com/HarperMitchell/status/1206770924755673088?s=19 …
黒田 東彦 stan 🚫 🛬 5️⃣-gon added,
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HarperMitchell @dfabu and
That is what it is, conflated in here is what was a poorly named intent status. It has since changed.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
So what? Anyone who cared to look at (public) Blink process could have seen it was super early. Disingenuous arguments from certain quarters didn't care & people got hurt (on my watch). Why would I put anyone back into that situation? Those people haven't apologised.
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.