Re: [w3c/charter-html] WebPlat charter: Include retrospectives (#147)

There are a couple of (admittedly loose) metrics that could be used.

* Browser adoption. For example, [`srcset` isn't supported in several prominent browsers](http://caniuse.com/#search=srcset).  Is that a problem with the spec - or something else?
* Impact. For example [Ink Markup Language](https://www.w3.org/TR/InkML/) was published in 2011. Has it had the impact that the authors wanted? If not, what should have been done differently.
* Security fallout. For example the [Vibration API](https://www.w3.org/TR/vibration/) has been well adopted, but has continually been a target for spammers and has some security implications. Given what we know now, what would the authors change?
* Community adoption. It might be interesting to work with GitHub to see if their users have started using specifications. For example, [EmotionML was published in 2014](https://www.w3.org/TR/emotionml/) - but today [there are only 70 files in the whole of GitHub which use the `appraisal-set` attribute](https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=%22%3Cemotion+appraisal-set%22&type=Code). Most of those seem to be referencing the specification.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/147#issuecomment-319002806

Received on Monday, 31 July 2017 08:31:45 UTC