I'm glad you see the JS process as impressive! Why not set an example at Chrome to bring that sort of process to web standards? As the absolute dominant (borderline monopoly) browser, your example here could do a ton of good.https://twitter.com/RickByers/status/1221142523198001157 …
-
-
Replying to @AdamRackis @RickByers and
TC39 is deeply unhealthy and has been for a long time. We route around via DOM frequently. Holding it up as a positive example is a mistake.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @AdamRackis and
I admit ignorance, never been to a TC39 meeting myself. All that I find impressive is that major new things like Wasm seem to come compatibly in all engines at about the same time, and (maybe?) in a reasonable timeframe? I can't imagine that happening elsewhere.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RickByers @slightlylate and
But I know I don't have the whole picture. The grass is always greener...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RickByers @slightlylate and
I think in the end it depends on whether or not there is broad consensus not in the solution, but on the problem. Once people agree there is a problem worth solving it is easier to work together on a solution. Why put effort into something you don't really feel is valuable?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @reillyeon @slightlylate and
Yeah, and often the best way to reach consensus on a problem is to trial or ship a solution for it in one engine and learn from real-world experience.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @RickByers @reillyeon and
Honestly I'd be 1,000% ok with that. But now, if I'm reading the screenshots of the original post correctly, Chrome folks are saying the shipped thing can't be changed, because it would break the web, because it's shipped. *That's* the part where people get justifiably pissed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdamRackis @RickByers and
But that screenshot was of one person, and maybe doesn't speak for everyone in Chrome-land, so maybe the spec can just be broken and fixed. One would hope.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdamRackis @RickByers and
I'm not familiar with this particular case. The way I read the last screenshot is that coming up with a plan to avoid breaking existing sites will definitely have to be part of the process of reaching compatibility.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @reillyeon @AdamRackis and
In my opinion that's a burden the Chromium project needs to bear.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
More to the point, it isn't clear a breaking change is even a good idea. Needless pain is only that. Now, back to the question: what compatible additions do folks want? We're open for business on that front.
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.