Re: Interop 2024

It does seem that it would be harder to claim that it is important and
should be paid attention to and prioritized if  - when the vendors say
"here we are, what do you need?" we get like 180 submissions and none of
them are about MathML-Core interop.  How would you see it?



On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 6:51 PM Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I plan on having this on the agenda for Thursday.
>
> @Brian: is it at all helpful if we identify the problems caused by the
> lack of interop? Or is a more positive "this is what it enables" tone
> better?
>
>     Neil
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 3:27 PM Deyan Ginev <deyan.ginev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> Yes, "interop" is a great mechanism. But browser vendors don't care what
>> is "important to me" - they didn't in 2013, and they still don't today.
>>
>> The realistic question in my mind is what needs to be strategically
>> accomplished/prepared by the WG for an interop request to succeed in
>> September 2024 (or 2025, or 2026...).
>> Securing funding and recruiting browser representatives to join the Math
>> WG are indeed highly impactful (and high difficulty).
>>
>> To quote your own words (which I agree with):
>> "We are very likely to face the same thing that we faced last year: that
>> math is no one's priority."
>>
>> (minuted at
>> https://github.com/w3c/mathml-core/issues/206#issuecomment-1736177722 )
>>
>> I would certainly support a group vote that selects a small MathML
>> implementation issue, with very narrow technical scope, which we then
>> collectively offer for "interop" consideration.
>> I suspect it still won't be picked up, but at least we'll maximize our
>> chances if we suggest something that looks really painless to fix.
>>
>> Deyan
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 4:41 PM Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Interop is the single best venue you have to make a case to all of the
>>> vendors at once that something is important to you.  Not only that, but new
>>> stuff + interop are taking priorities so getting something beyond those is
>>> extra hard unless we find someone to fund the work - which, while we have
>>> done it thanks to a few sources -  seems to have limits for math :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 10:51 AM Deyan Ginev <deyan.ginev@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Neil, all,
>>>>
>>>> Is the interop effort a good place for Math WG members to independently
>>>> start filing new issues? I am a little hesitant, myself.
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't it make more sense to first see if we have buy-in from the
>>>> respective browser vendors (and meet any conditions to gain that)?
>>>> Once we hear back a "soft yes" from the right vendors, we could file an
>>>> interop issue to make things official.
>>>> Experience seems to show that "cold outreach" requests don't move the
>>>> needle too much in MathML browser land.
>>>>
>>>> I can certainly imagine making CSS support for MathML Core a public
>>>> "implementation priority" for the Math WG, where we do enough liaison work
>>>> to have backing for a small number of features to gain parity.
>>>> At which point there may be a then-successful interop issue for 2025
>>>> (or 2026,...)
>>>>
>>>> Just thinking out loud,
>>>> Deyan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 1:23 AM Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To give a little context to Brian's message, the interop effort is an
>>>>> effort to make browsers behave the same/have the same features so
>>>>> developers can count on a feature working in all main browsers when they
>>>>> use the feature.
>>>>>
>>>>> MathML core has some significant features missing from Webkit/Safari
>>>>> and Gecko/Firefox. This means that you can't really use a number of
>>>>> features in MathML core. For example, you can't use CSS with MathML in
>>>>> Safari or Firefox. This is a major frustration for me as a MathML full
>>>>> polyfill author because I can't do some of the polyfills without having to
>>>>> target each browser separately. I know I've seen others complain about this
>>>>> and other issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is your chance to make the case for why some of the top
>>>>> implementers in the browser world should concentrate on some feature. As
>>>>> Brian has said more than once, there are A LOT of things outside of math
>>>>> that need attention. We need to make a little noise if we are ever going to
>>>>> get some math features to rise to the level of even being considered. If
>>>>> you have bumped your head into some cross-platform issue with MathML Core,
>>>>> say something by filing a Focus Area Proposal issue. The odds of it getting
>>>>> addressed are not high, but the odds are zero if you don't file an issue.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Neil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 11:11 PM Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is now open:
>>>>>> https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/new/choose
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The core group had requested i let them know when it was.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: bkardell.com
>>>
>>

-- 
Brian Kardell :: @briankardell :: bkardell.com