- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 13:02:08 -0400
On 10/6/11 12:11 PM, Adam Barth wrote: > It sounds like you're arguing that it's better for developers if we > fail fast and hard In some cases, yes. It's a tradeoff in every case, obviously. A meta-issue: if you disagree with the spec text when implementing something, silently implementing something else seems strictly worse than raising a spec issue (and still implementing something else if desired). Especially for things that you're planning to implement unprefixed. Likewise for cases when the spec is unclear, etc. What's the point of having implementations early in the specification process if they don't actually provide feedback and instead only serve to lock in behaviors? -Boris
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2011 10:02:08 UTC