domenicd

16 ms·

121.
by domenicd 7y ago
> That is a good point, yes. Arguably it should have been left in as a void element with no behavior to avoid parsing issues of the sort you describe... That's what we did, actually :). Parsing behavior was unchanged. Ctrl+F "k
122.
by domenicd 7y ago
Hmm, you seem to have skipped over some of my points. The WHATWG is open to input from all, but only things browsers are willing to ship get into the specs. So yes, that's more power. No disputing that. But I would rather not have spec
123.
by domenicd 7y ago
The main restriction here is people willing to volunteer. We have tons of specs desperate for more maintenance work. If you'd like to get involved, please do so, and if you can spend significant amount of time on any of them, I imagine
124.
by domenicd 7y ago
Folks may find the more-detailed blog post linked at https://www.w3.org/blog/2019/05/w3c-and-whatwg-to-work-toget... to be more clear. Also, for the full details, here is a direct link to the agreement: http
125.
by domenicd 7y ago
> WHATWG is basically the browser vendors sidelining W3C to discuss what features HTML etc should have. One way of looking at it is who has final say what ends up in the documents. That seems to be what you're discussing. In the W3C
126.
by domenicd 7y ago
> All the editors are pretty much from one company, which feels like handing over control of the web to that one company essentially. Which company are you referring to? Per https://github.com/whatwg/sg/blob&#x
127.
by domenicd 7y ago
The biggest concrete impact, in my opinion, will be the removal of confusion in the web developer community around where things are specified. Currently W3C forks ( https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Fork_tracking ) are often
128.
by domenicd 7y ago
The W3C citations on MDN are a historical artifact by the documentation folks, not influenced by the browser folks. There's a slow movement to consolidate around what's implemented and stop referencing W3C forks, and I think today
129.
by domenicd 7y ago
https://whatwg.org/faq#spell-and-pronounce
130.
by domenicd 7y ago
A better resources is https://wpt.fyi/ , which contains comprehensive test results in all browser engines. These days, at least for WHATWG specs, tests are required before any changes land in the specification, so wpt.fyi wi
131.
by domenicd 8y ago
It seems a bit unfortunate to quote a sentence out of context and then misinterpret it like that. Let's expand the quote by one sentence: > If your site currently uses localStorage, you should try switching to the KV Storage API, an
132.
by domenicd 8y ago
Ah, yeah, unlike bundling tools like Rollup, webpack doesn't have the ability to output modern JavaScript module scripts, only classic scripts. The article links to a feature request on webpack to support this: https://githu
133.
by domenicd 8y ago
Hi callahad, I think there's some confusion about the standards venue this is taking place in. This work is being done in the WICG, at https://github.com/WICG/kv-storage . The TC39 staging process, while relevant f
134.
by domenicd 8y ago
https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2019/03/kv-storage... , and especially the demo , show how you can use tooling for this use case.
135.
by domenicd 8y ago
At the W3C TPAC 2018 meeting, the spec editors for the IndexedDB spec agreed that after incubation (in the WICG, which is another less-formal standards group), KV storage should "graduate" by being incorporated into the W3C Indexe
136.
by domenicd 8y ago
Not quite! Like built-in globals, built-in modules are a shared workspace between all standards bodies. In this case, KV storage is a web standard, for a built-in module that will be a web feature. This is similar to how IndexedDB is a web
137.
by domenicd 8y ago
Hey! Spec editor here. KV storage is being worked on in a standards body, the WICG. It has healthy cross-vendor collaboration, including Mozilla (who influenced the API design and naming significantly) and Microsoft (who encouraged us to wo
138.
by domenicd 8y ago
+1. It's all strings (of source code) in the end. It's just a matter of how well the tools support those strings. There exists a medium-sized ecosystem of tools which supports static checks on strings inside angle brackets, a la J
139.
by domenicd 8y ago
HTM is React-compatible, and has all the React semantics: e.g. you can interpolate attributes (with ...${foo} instead of React's ...foo) and tag names (with <${foo}> instead of React's capitalization-dependent <Foo>).
140.
by domenicd 9y ago
Oh, you're right, I forgot HTML! That is co-edited by someone from Bocoup too. So make it 5 out of 15.
141.
by domenicd 9y ago
We do this almost daily in the WHATWG :) https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/commit-snapshots/
142.
by domenicd 9y ago
Yeah, we try to make the WHATWG a welcoming place for all, with no pay-to-play structure. Please feel free to provide your voice there! We've gotten a lot of good community contributions and ideas.
143.
by domenicd 9y ago
The MIME Sniffing, Streams, Console, and Quirks Mode Standards are all edited by people who are not working for the browser-engine-developer companies. (Streams is co-edited by Googlers as well.) That's 4 out of the 15 standards curren
144.
by domenicd 9y ago
We definitely believe users should have a voice in the WHATWG, and thus in guiding what browsers implement. We strive to maintain an open and welcoming community; this has brought a lot of good ideas to the table. A few years ago I gave a t
145.
by domenicd 9y ago
The WHATWG is actually the only organization I know of that publishers a developer-focused specification; see https://html.spec.whatwg.org/dev/ . (We only do it for HTML currently.) Anyway, I agree with the grandparent
146.
by domenicd 9y ago
This isn't accurate; notably, the WHATWG is the standards body that is actually open to public input (see https://whatwg.org/faq#process ). Whereas to give input to the W3C, you have to pay membership fees ( https:&#x2F
147.
by domenicd 9y ago
Not sure exactly what your comment is saying, but at least one reading is that "browsers are the only stakeholders in the WHATWG", which is not accurate. The WHATWG is a community organization open to participation by all; see ht
148.
by domenicd 9y ago
This information about how the WHATWG works is somewhat outdated; please see https://whatwg.org/faq for more.
149.
by domenicd 9y ago
In fact, we already do publish commit snapshots for every change we make: https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/commit-snapshots/
150.
by domenicd 9y ago
This seems clearly false. Let's say the page with the best information about dogs took an infinite amount of time to load (never loaded). I don't think you'd want that page to be ranked highly. What about if that page took a

More ›