On 25.7.2012 16:04, David Bruant wrote:
Le 25/07/2012 15:32, Bronislav Klučka a écrit :
And my last remark: I hope major browser vendors will chose to follow
the same path, the same implementation of tasks, but not all major
vendors are part of WHATWG (as far as I know), and if some choose to
follow W3C and some different WHATWG drafts of the same task, what
would happen?
Interesting question...
(Thou I do not think it actually will happen). To put it simply, it
does not matter, what either W3C or WHATWG codify, what matter is,
what browsers implement - it was always about vendors...
... which you answer yourself to.
If the WHATWG continue to work in ways that we know (including
codifying de facto standards to preserve content backward
compatibility), then no matter what browsers will to do (follow one
spec or several or none), the end result is that the WHATWG will
codify what works.
As an example, they spec'ed innerHTML which was first implemented in
IE (and followed by all others) which isn't part of the WHATWG. There
are probably dozens of these examples.
This goes to my "Interesting question", I do understand the advantage of
"codifying supported convention", but in case of differences... And it's
already happening (on vendor level... maybe not differences at the same
task, but different approaches on similar tasks, decisions not to
implement some parts of WebApp - but I guess it's inevitable).
W3C forgot that.
Who did? I mean, the actual people. Who should we be talking to to
convince them that web standards are more the consequence of an
implementation rather than the opposite (regardless of whether this is
a good situation or not)?
David
I do not know who actually decided, that W3C will be inventor instead of
codifier... It's like 14 years ago :). And I'm not in either group. Just
remembering those times :) You should ask the people that were behind
creation of WHATWG (there must have been a reason why some vendors, part
of WG working on web tech, decided to leave and start their own project
- there must have been someone opposing the idea of fast progress of
HTML, there must have been someone trying to push XHTML2 at all costs,
there must have been someone who though, that vendors opinion is
irrelevant, or less important).
I was just looking at WHATWG wiki and there is nice sentence: "In
general the WHATWG will ensure that the normative content of the
specifications (the requirements on authors and implementors) remains
the same so long as the W3C group doesn't demonstrate any serious lapses
in judgement."
B.
