Web lists-archives.com

Re: Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards

In <news:BZ6dndjo5vm9-3DBnZ2dnUU7-Q_NnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> REF: 
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/browser-vendors-win-war-with-w3c-over-html-and-dom-standards/
> [excerpt quote=\"
> An industry group made up the four major browser vendors, such as
> Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla, have won a tug-of-war with the
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the standards body for the World
> Wide Web, effectively proving that without their support, the W3C's
> ability to regulate web standards is nonexistent.
> \" /]
> When competitors own standards criteria, 'standards' becomes an
> oxymoron.

The article sort of makes it seem that the major browser vendors (is
Mozilla really still "major"?) have tighter control of the WHATWG
standards than they actually do.  Anyone can contribute to the
discussions (kinda like W3C);  the standards editors who make the
decisions about what's in or out are supposed to take all the input into
account, and AFAIK they have a pretty good reputation for doing so.
Them main power the browser vendors have is that if they think things
are going off the rails, they can impeach and replace an editor.  I
don't think they've ever done so.

I could be off on some or all of that -- I haven't paid much attention
to the WHATWG since Hixie was the HTML5 editor.

The last time W3C lost to WHATWG, over whether the future of the web
was HTML or XHTML, the W3C kept its position as "the" standards
organization by adopting WHATWG's HTML standard.  At that point, there
was some talk within the WHATWG about dissolving itself as no longer
necessary.  Now it looks like the W3C may be the one to dissolve over
the next few years.

> Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.

Only prefer?  ;)  I always found WHATWG's documentation 100% useless.

general mailing list