It seems like I need to be more explicit part 3 in -- specifically for webdevs -- in my blog post series about standards (a small thread): 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/ …
..and I2I/I2P is part of that massive effort to do so. Disingenuous misrepresentations by some not withstanding, that's what the team *was doing*.
-
-
And "the process" is *vendor specific*. Some vendors find it convenient to wait on others to trailblaze and lean on formal WG stages to judge when.m to invest. This is a situational choice.
-
As an outsider to this whole process, it feels like you deliberately use language that positions Google as a savior of the web (trailblaze, etc.) as an excuse to may just do whatever you want. That may not be what's *actually* going on, but those are the optics.
- 19 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.