Re: Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 20:53:56 +0200
- From: GerardJan <gertjan.vinkesteijn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards
My bloviated meandering follows what »Q« graced us with on 5/29/2019 7:47 AM:
wrt editors, I suspect they probably get their funding by the major browser
companies, no? They most likely bounce off what get changed with the major
browser companies (reads: Google and Apple) liaisons beforehand, if they have
any political sense at all. That arrangement works fine until one of those opens
a gap in a new technology, e.g., Google in home security and entertainment where
it is disparately trying to cut into Amazon's clear lead. The incentive to push
Googlisms into the standards might be too much for them to resist. Then we have
the whole nebula of IoT, no telling the impact that will have. But, most scarily
of all is the impact that will end up driving the industry sector just as it did
with the internet itself. I speak, my friend, of the emergence of the interweb
connected SEX BOTS! One shutters when they think about the incompatibility
problems that will wreak on the standards :-)
Sailfish <NIXCAPSsailfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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
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.
Irony defines this industry.
Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.
Only prefer? ;) I always found WHATWG's documentation 100% useless.
If A equals success, then the formula is A = X + Y + Z.
X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut.
-- Albert Einstein
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0
Build identifier: 20190526051124
general mailing list