Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] <search> HTML element (Issue #714)

#### Fact-checking the description

> [form submission functionality] was not palatable to implementers, other web developers, or the accessibility community.

"Palate" is the gauge of the master chef, not the master engineer, but it sums up the reasoning against form functionality well: dislike, not technical reasons.

- Only one web developer opposed form functionality (Scott, who wrote the specification): he has repeated Domenic's mistaken assumption about duplication and huge implementation costs. An unsound argument.
- From the accessibility community only one person commented (Carolyn, who made the proposal).
- A few of his colleagues at Google nodded in the previous triage meeting in support. The meeting was running long with no agreement in sight, so people just wanted to be over with it.
- No implementers have shared their evaluation of the implementation with form functionality. Despite this, Domenic has falsely [claimed]( https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/5811#issuecomment-965201571 ) that "both implementers" (who?) have "answered, several times".

Only 2 "primary contacts" and recently a colleague of Domenic commented in opposition of form functionality.
The 8 developers who [explicitly requested form functionality]( https://kaleidea.github.io/whatwg-search-proposal/#requests-for-this-feature ) are not even mentioned.
The bias is apparent. Domenic has consistently overstated support for his preferred outcome, amplifying opinions that support it and suppressing contradictory information.


> I'm not sure if this counts as "unresolved", since we've resolved to move ahead with the current approach

In fact, we couldn't come to a conclusion as time was running out. This cannot be resolved until the real risks and complexities are understood by participants.


-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/714#issuecomment-1033505325
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/714/1033505325@github.com>