distinguishing Web Platform-oriented RECs from World Wide Web RECs.

Recently there was a request to "Reconsider W3C Recommendation status of
XSLT 2.0 and XSLT 3.0" (see https://github.com/w3ctag/obsoletion/issues/10).

In the process Dan Brickley made what I thought was an interesting comment:

I take this as evidence in favour of distinguishing 'Web Platform'
> -oriented RECs from 'World Wide Web' RECs.



> The former is concerned heavily with implementability, usability, coherent
> design, attack surface and technical debt issues. The latter is humanity's
> planet-wide shared memory. Once deployed, its data formats do not really
> ever go away, and thoughtful specs need to respect this reality. Many W3C
> efforts have aspects of both flavour of web standard, but are often closer
> to one cluster.


XSLT appears for now to be primarily a 'World Wide Web' standard, even if
> 0.02% of page loads is still a significant number for the parties trying to
> use those pages. XSLT will also continue chugging away in the background,
> unseen but enabling many other page views.


I don't want to reopen this github issue, but it is worth trying to come up
> with a non-polarizing framing for where things like XSLT fit in the web
> standards landscape, and how W3C handles its ageing XML portfolio.


(see https://github.com/w3ctag/obsoletion/issues/10#issuecomment-3637735401)

I think this is an especially interesting point when we also consider that
we have a mix of other things deployed in the world too, which aren't just
in the browser: Web Views (and embedded views), IWAs, miniapps and so on...
It would be interesting to see if there are non-polarizing (maybe more
importantly some potentially helpful) ways to define these things...

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