W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Costs and Benefits of Early Implementations (was Re: The harm that can come if the W3C supports publication of competing specs)

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 02:03:48 -0800
Message-ID: <7789133a1001180203i6609bb53p68acd5d4543c3d96@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
> I think the timeline was in this order:
>
> 1) Initial draft of LocalStorage goes in the spec and sees some refinement.
> 2) Google Chrome begins secret development and implements multiprocess. The existence of Chrome and its multiprocess nature are a closely guarded secret.
> 3) WebKit implements LocalStorage in the public tree, but Chrome doesn't merge or adapt the changes before initial release.
> 4) Chrome engineers adapt WebKit's LocalStorage implementation to work with their multiprocess model and discover issues.
> 5) Chrome engineers report the problem.
>
> So with regards to Chrome, matters are as James describes. In theory, if Google had shared more of their plans sooner or integrated their multiprocess work directly into WebKit, we might have known about the problems sooner, and potentially might have dealt with it before IE shipped. But it would have been an accident of fate.

The ie-team, of course, was implementing multi-process and
localStorage at the same time in the same code base.  Moreover, IE has
been multi-threaded since time immemorial.  It's unfortunate they did
not realize the issue and inform the working group.

Adam
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 10:04:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:12 UTC