4 ms·

This specific decision turned out to be mistaken, but W3C makes this type of mistake way more often and doesn't even always fix them. You can see in the record

by om2 9y ago

This specific decision turned out to be mistaken, but W3C makes this type of mistake way more often and doesn't even always fix them. You can see in the record of this issue that the problem was eventually resolved. WHATWG Working Mode has also been updated since this change and would not allow this type of change to be made today without implementor support. Regardless of issues like this, browsers track WHATWG DOM near exclusively. You can see devs from all of the major browser engines commenting in the issue you linked.

austincheney 9y ago
A big difference is that it took somebody new to the WHATWG (many years later) to admit failure and correct the problem very directly. In the past the WHATWG had a severe case of not invented here syndrome and would troll people to death who disagreed with them. I know from my own conversations with the WHATWG this wasn't something that long time WHATWG members would admit to (or even understand). It was the childishness, perhaps more than anything else, that nobody took them seriously. > Regardless of issues like this, browsers track WHATWG DOM near exclusively. I am going to disagree with you there. Perhaps they do now, extremely recently, but historically this is absolutely false. > You can see devs from all of the major browser engines commenting in the issue you linked. Yes, everybody participates in the WHATWG. This isn't new. Participation is different than adopting those recommendations back into your software. Here is what browsers actually implement: https://www.w3.org/DOM/DOMTR https://www.w3.org/DOM/DOMTR and https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/ https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/ It is important to keep in mind that the WHATWG doesn't do a lot of XML work, but the DOM is markup language agnostic. The DOM isn't something created or maintained in an HTML rich vacuum.
- om2 9y ago
  Do you work on a browser engine? I do (WebKit). Your claim that browsers actually implement W3C DOM 4.1 is just totally wrong. We don't even read it. The person who ultimately fixed this problem in the DOM Living Standard is Anne Van Kesteren, who was not even remotely new to WHATWG at the time. The person who filed this issue (Philip) is also a WHATWG old timer.

by om2 9y ago

austincheney 9y ago

A big difference is that it took somebody new to the WHATWG (many years later) to admit failure and correct the problem very directly. In the past the WHATWG had a severe case of not invented here syndrome and would troll people to death who disagreed with them. I know from my own conversations with the WHATWG this wasn't something that long time WHATWG members would admit to (or even understand). It was the childishness, perhaps more than anything else, that nobody took them seriously. > Regardless of issues like this, browsers track WHATWG DOM near exclusively. I am going to disagree with you there. Perhaps they do now, extremely recently, but historically this is absolutely false. > You can see devs from all of the major browser engines commenting in the issue you linked. Yes, everybody participates in the WHATWG. This isn't new. Participation is different than adopting those recommendations back into your software. Here is what browsers actually implement: https://www.w3.org/DOM/DOMTR https://www.w3.org/DOM/DOMTR and https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/ https://www.w3.org/TR/dom41/ It is important to keep in mind that the WHATWG doesn't do a lot of XML work, but the DOM is markup language agnostic. The DOM isn't something created or maintained in an HTML rich vacuum.

om2 9y ago
Do you work on a browser engine? I do (WebKit). Your claim that browsers actually implement W3C DOM 4.1 is just totally wrong. We don't even read it. The person who ultimately fixed this problem in the DOM Living Standard is Anne Van Kesteren, who was not even remotely new to WHATWG at the time. The person who filed this issue (Philip) is also a WHATWG old timer.