After almost a year of discussions, Apple confirms what we already knew: there will be no customized built-ins

https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/97#issuecomment-1645167814

#HTML #WebComponents #specification #DOM #WHATWG

"Towards a Modern Web Stack"

This is interesting.

Ian "Hixie" Hickson editor of #WhatWG HTML specification for 10 years, in January 2023 criticises the use of #HTML, #CSS, #Javascript for intricate #Web applications, and proposes an alternate approach based on 4 lower-level #OpenStandards:

1. #WebAssembly

2. #WebGPU

3. #ARIA (for #a11y)

4. #WebHID

Gets criticised for it and defends his proposal on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34612696

(Correct link to the Google Doc is in bottom comment by Hixie)

looking at #WHATWG streams. it doesn’t look like there’s an equivalent to a #NodeJS “object mode” stream, am I correct?

It's such a huge failure of the #webStandards bodies that slippy maps are STILL not a standardized part of the #webPlatform.

If #Google actually wanted to advance the #openWeb they'd standardize #googleMaps, but I'm certain they don't want to give up that #monopoly.

#webDev #w3c #whatWg #maps #web

In the five years between the creation of the #WHATWG and the switch from Presto to WebKit (and then Blink) by Opera, their role within the working group was essential as an independent standard implementor. Anything that was supported by two out of three (at the time, Apple, Mozilla, Opera) vendors meant different _engines_ implemented the standard. Today, three out of five implementations agreeing is meaningless, since they are most likely just WebKit and its forks.

[en] An announcement was made that's "a huge change in the web standards landscape because it effectively means that browser vendors will be solely responsible for the most important web standards today, and not the W3C and the hundreds of its members." so much for participation of civil society in shaping the future of the web. https://www.zdnet.com/article/browser-vendors-win-war-with-w3c-over-html-and-dom-standards/ #html #w3c #whatwg #InternetStandards

Which standards body has more infighting between competing vendors? #whatwg #html5 #otel #opentelemetry

Is there a 5xx or 4xx for “yup, server side error but clearly client/3rd party code made the server trip the wires” other than slow down fellas aka 429? I dug through whatwg and nada. #rfc #http #whatwg #web

@saxnot

This depiction is incredibly naive.

#Google&friends use #OpenSource strategically, to disrupt markets they have no share in (think of early #Chrome), to lock-in users into their #surveillance (think of #Android), to lobby for or against certain global architectures (think of #HTTP/3, that they can only impose because they control the two major browsers, Chrome and #Firefox), and so on...

Their projects have OpenSource licenses (mostly permissive ones) just because they keep strict control over the whole development process (and can impose manufacturers to deploy their proprietary tools) both through #patents and by rising software complexity beyond what anybody else can handle (not even #Microsoft was able to keep parity with Google controlled #WHATWG #LivingStandards).

The mith they develop what they need to run, is just a myth of #OSS.
Much like the idea that being open would imply to be higher quality, "thousand eyebals, yadda yadda".

@bagder

RT @tabatkins@twitter.com

By the by, the Freenode fuckery has meant we've moved both the TC39 and WHATWG rooms to Matrix:
* #tc39-general:http://matrix.org
* #whatwg:http://matrix.org

🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/tabatkins/status/1398075087618596866

OK, I finally realized that #Mastodon (#web) follows the URL standard made by #WHATWG.

https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-rendering-simplification
QT: https://qoto.org/@sd/104003564311805838

@nolan

The fact that you have to write more #JavaScript to make your #SPA more accessible doesn't mean that #JS is an accessibility tool, but that #browsers have removed or downplayed #Accessibility.

Think about it: you need to do more work to do something that should work by default.

The fact is that browsers' vendors like #Google, and #Google (who back #Mozilla and control #WHATWG) don't REALLY care about blind and visually impaired #people. At best, they care about their #data.

If you spend, you deserve to exist.

@dpwiz

#SMTP for example.
#ICMP is another.
Even #FTP still rocks (in private networks or over a VPN).

#HTTP 1.0 was pretty good to distribute #HyperTexts. Turned to shit as #WHATWG decided to transform the Web into a distributed (and highly insecure) operating system.

@Wolf480pl@niu.moe @technomancy

@z

#Chromium is not much different from #Firefox: both depends on #Google money.

@yogthos

#GAFAM controls #WHATWG too and #LivingStandards follow the predominant implementations (guess who is predominant) so, despite the rhetoric there is no openness (nor #Freedom) in such "Open Standards".

As for #W3C I think this comment express well the state of affairs since years: https://www.w3.org/blog/2017/12/whatwg-working-mode-changes/#comment-96140

@zensaiyuki

This is plain wrong.

I was a Web developer while it was happening and it was clear something was going terribly wrong with #HTML5 and #WHATWG.

The degradation of the #Web from an #HyperText system to a badly broken application distribution platform and runtime has been a deliberate military decision from the #US.

See https://medium.com/@giacomo_59737/the-web-is-still-a-darpa-weapon-31e3c3b032b8

@clacke