- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 14:02:35 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 5/4/12 1:26 PM, Florian Rivoal wrote: > In the cases where implementations and real world usage are ahead of the > spec, then yes, it would limit the ability of the WG to make incompatible > changes. But this isn't necessarily bad. It can be quite bad. Several WG members have indicated on numerous occasions that as a matter of company policy they are unable to propose something for standardization until they have shipped a (prefixed, at the moment) implementation of it. What this means with your proposal is that any ideas they have, no matter how half-baked, would have to be dumped out on the web without a prefix before they could even start to bring them to the working group. And it doesn't take a feature being "massively popular" to poison the well. All it takes is one popular site using it for UAs to not be able to change its behavior. > This doesn't mean that the WG would just be a rubber stand body validating > de-facto standards. I think this would be the most likely outcome of this proposal, given the interactions between shipping and initial standardization proposals described above... -Boris
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 18:03:17 UTC