RE: Proposed standards evolutionary lifecycle

On Dec 15, 2012 3:13 PM, "François REMY" <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>
wrote:
>
> The people who have the best ideas are not especially the best ones to
write a spec. I’m not sure there exists an ‘ideal’ way to ceate specs: the
web needs everybody and what he can do. The important thing is that there
should be a place where the community can bring new & innovative ideas and
get help in standardizing them.
>
> However, I agree that the ideal standardization process involves both
a working draft and a forward polyfill. Yet, if someone can bring only one
or the other, this is already a good step towards standardization.
>
>
>
>
>
> De : Brian Kardell
> Envoyé : 15 décembre 2012 05:54
> À : public-nextweb@w3.org
> Objet : Proposed standards evolutionary lifecycle
>
> How things go from idea to standard/rec in my ideal world.. Clint and I
were discussing this yesterday and it has apparently never been articulated
by me, so I'd like to share it here...
>
> * someone has an idea
>
> * they create a proposal and send it to the list for early comment
>
> * if they are still interested, they turn that into an unofficial draft
(there are templates to unofficial drafts that look like this
http://fremycompany.com/TR/2012/ED-css-custom/) and send it to the list -
ideally along with a draft, but I suppose that some may post drafts hoping
someone else will implement.
>
> * Once we have a versioned implementation and draft - that's a
prollyfill. It gets an initial review, gets added to the list..
>
> *  It may change, spawn forks and variants, etc.  It might be helpful to
encourage that these be referenced right off the site during development or
something (we can place a CDN like cloudflare in front of it) to allow us
to get some idea about how any people are using..
>
> *  It gets tested heavily - algorithms worked out, etc with test suites.
>
> * If it gets mature and seems to have a lot of support/traction we submit
it for consideration and lobby for it.
>
> * It gets a legitimate draft in the appropriate body (most often that
would be W3C I think, but ECMA might be another)
>
> * At this point, if we have been able to keep W3C members reasonably up
to date, the normal process to real standard and implementation should be
simple, relatively uneventful and fast.
>
> --
> Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: hitchjs.com
>

Sure, that's basically what I am trying to describe... I think you are
reading too much into my choice of words there.  I just meant it is
significantly smoother if your draft comes with an initial reference
implementation (like adobe's recent ones or Chris').