3 ms·
> Trying to design this kind of thing to anticipate every possible future good thing that might come along is a folly. If you can't standardize them yet because
by dmitriid 4y ago
> Trying to design this kind of thing to anticipate every possible future good thing that might come along is a folly. If you can't standardize them yet because you don't even know
Whatever you design for the web stays on the web for decades. So yes, you have to look into the future and anticipate things. It's not "move fast and break things"
- DannyBee 4y agoI'm not at all suggesting move fast and break things. Yes, things stay for decades. So don't standardize something when you have literally no idea what good looks like. There is a limit to anticipation. Trying to guess what the world will look like 10 years from now is dumb. Nobody does it well. So just because v1 will have inertia doesn't mean you will actually predict the future more successfully. Instead, you have to figure out how you deal with that inertia. In practice, the reason things have tremendous intertia is because they are often not built to be migrated from or to in a relatively seamless way. Those standards that allow for easy migration tend to see much faster adoption of new versions. Those that don't, the old standards linger even longer.