I think there is a large spectrum of standards bodies and working to productize outside research and aspirations is a part of some good standards bodies. Not a

I think there is a large spectrum of standards bodies and working to productize outside research and aspirations is a part of some good standards bodies. Not a lot of people are calling WHATWG a bad standards body, but it is even worse at taking stuff directly out of Blink research and labeling it a draft standard with only a single implementation with sometimes seemingly very little study into its safety or long-term viability. I suppose there is a small distinction between Ivory Tower academic aspirations and research versus Walled Garden corporate aspirations and research, but at the end of the day it certainly feels the same, and I have more reasons, myself, to admire the academic aspirations that aren't tied to corporate interests and profit motives, but I can understand why some feel what Google and WHATWG is doing is better for the web because they start with that first "implementation" of their research instead of a chalkboard and a hope for a better web.