3 ms·
That's a de facto standard. In IT things generally have to be submitted and approved by an independent standards body for it to be classed as a standard.
by laumars 9y ago
That's a de facto standard. In IT things generally have to be submitted and approved by an independent standards body for it to be classed as a standard.
- tannhaeuser 9y agoI get your point, but the question is which organization qualifies as "independent standard body"? W3C? They've certainly acted in good faith IMHO, and being TBL's child and formally endorsed by The Internet Society, which is itself endorsed by IETF, have been the go-to organization for web standards of the past, but are nevertheless a pay-your-way organization struggling financially ever since the XHTML fiasco. And it shows in their published standards of WHATWG's HTML5 specs, edited by a Microsoft employee to reflect the degree to which Microsoft browsers support HTML. WHATWG? They've certainly brought forward HTML5, but have been financially dependent on Google from the get-go. Not wanting to diminish their achievements, but HTML and CSS have become "whatever Chrome does" for some time now. Web "standards" have become such monstrosities of complexity as to be pointless as a standard, with WHATWG pushing WASM to become even more complex. And a more declarative web isn't in Google's interest, because this would undermine their competitive advantage of being able to crawl JS-only content, and the defacto ubiquity of ga tracking. Rather, after usurping and driving HTML to the ground, Google is putting their weight behind AMP.