4 ms·
Wouldn't that be de facto? De jure would mean there is some kind of law. I feel we have the opposite, quickly shifting de facto standards without any place to r
by Fargren 10y ago
Wouldn't that be de facto? De jure would mean there is some kind of law. I feel we have the opposite, quickly shifting de facto standards without any place to reference what is "correct" today.
- jerf 10y agoI'm using de jure to contrast the de facto; I think frameworks are the "next big thing" before they're even fact. That Javascript Guy comes up to you, asks you what you're using, and then berates you for not using Hot New Thing, de jure-ing you into using it, or at least feeling bad for not using it. Part of the way I've resisted being sucked into the JS vortex over the past few years is that I thoroughly reject the authoritative claims that I should be using X or Y, on the grounds that I don't particularly respect the technical judgment of the people making those claims. (And check that last clause carefully; all the Next Big Things are generally engineered pretty well, it's the advocates berating you for not keeping up to date that I'm dissing.)