- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 10:00:33 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 5/5/12 9:45 AM, Lea Verou wrote: > 1. It has been mentioned in this thread that it’s against company policy > of several implementors. Indeed. I think said company policies are actively harmful... Not like the working group can do anything about it per se, other than exerting public opinion pressure. > 2. It defies the entire advantage that prefixes were supposed to bring: > Getting author input for in-development features. When the feature is > present only in a preview (or in a stable build, but behind a switch), > the volume of author feedback declines tremendously. Yes, indeed. Does it decline by enough to offset the benefits? I'd be interested in numbers; my totally non-scientific impression from the "looking at the bug database" side is that Mozilla gets a large fraction of our useful feedback for spec purposes (not compat purposes, mind you) from our nightly and aurora builds as things stand. Of course I could just be missing a significant feedback channel. > I believe Alex Russell has specific statistics of how big a decline we’re talking > about, but I recall it’s > 90%. I would be very interested in seeing those numbers and the specific context for them. > This would result in specs being > developed almost blindly, detached from the reality of author needs. Do > we want that? No, not at all. -Boris
Received on Saturday, 5 May 2012 14:01:03 UTC