In a new framework called e.g Foobar (2 letter abbreviation: fo) that uses many HTML attributes, what do you prefer for the attribute names?
-
-
Dunno, Google has been promoting
@wicg_ hugely, basically forcing every W3C WG to use it for everything, so it's odd. -
probably gives proposals from existing members more of a populist look w/o moving outsider proposals much faster :/
-
Basically, there's less of a process, so browser vendors can pick whatever they like with no reasoning.
-
I've seen this kind of thing throughout my life in various places. It's very clever.
-
The funny thing is, this stuff is promoted as more community participation. LOL?
-
that's why it's so clever!
-
yup. They even managed to convince authors to defend this, lol. Meanwhile, the WG hands are tied except for the tiniest spec details
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
An explainer on GitHub would be desirable, I think (problem + proposal + use cases); discussions per se are not compelling
-
this feels pretty wrong for me. Understanding beyond the walls of google makes proposals better.
-
"we already have a solution" "WHY ARE YOU SO AGAINST IT" is like groundhog day at this point.
End of conversation
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.