Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Browser vendors win war with W3C over HTML and DOM standards

Sailfish-4
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.

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

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Don Spam's Reckless Son
Sailfish 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.
>
> Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.
>

The article indicates that the named browser vendors had cooperated to
produce their own standard because they did not like the one W3C had
come up with.
That is not necessarily a bad thing, you know the saying "A camel is a
horse designed by a committee"?  I have no idea what camel W3C came up
with but if the browser vendows refuse to implement it, I'd assume there
was something fundamentally wrong with it.

--
spammus ergo sum, viruses courtesy of https://www.nsa.gov/malware/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what Don Spam's Reckless Son graced us
with on 5/28/2019 11:30 AM:

> Sailfish 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.
>>
>> Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.
>>
>
> The article indicates that the named browser vendors had cooperated to
> produce their own standard because they did not like the one W3C had
> come up with.
> That is not necessarily a bad thing, you know the saying "A camel is a
> horse designed by a committee"?  I have no idea what camel W3C came up
> with but if the browser vendows refuse to implement it, I'd assume there
> was something fundamentally wrong with it.
>
Point taken but whole reason W3C came about was due to the Wild West
browserisms implemented by different vendors, e.q., (Microsoft marquee
tag, Netscape Layer tag, &c) and while most of the browser 'players' are
using Apple-developed Webkit engine, Google ditch Apple's version and
create their own.

I'm not lamenting it, just expecting more incompatibilities to creep in
as the media continues to evolve.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Wolf K.
On 2019-05-28 15:09, Sailfish wrote:

> My bloviated meandering follows what Don Spam's Reckless Son graced us
> with on 5/28/2019 11:30 AM:
>> Sailfish 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.
>>>
>>> Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.
>>>
>>
>> The article indicates that the named browser vendors had cooperated to
>> produce their own standard because they did not like the one W3C had
>> come up with.
>> That is not necessarily a bad thing, you know the saying "A camel is a
>> horse designed by a committee"?  I have no idea what camel W3C came up
>> with but if the browser vendows refuse to implement it, I'd assume
>> there was something fundamentally wrong with it.
>>
> Point taken but whole reason W3C came about was due to the Wild West
> browserisms implemented by different vendors, e.q., (Microsoft marquee
> tag, Netscape Layer tag, &c) and while most of the browser 'players' are
> using Apple-developed Webkit engine, Google ditch Apple's version and
> create their own.
>
> I'm not lamenting it, just expecting more incompatibilities to creep in
> as the media continues to evolve.
>


Standards are necessary, the only themes worth discussing are which
ones. interoperability and safety are primary, convenience is nice to
have. Esthetics, kewlness, etc and so on so forth are whatever the
vendor wants so long as they don't compromise safety, interoperability
or convenience.

Model: the NMRA's Standards and Recommended Practices, which have made
model trains about as nearly plug'n'play as toys can be. The vendors
realised early on that by following these standards they could sell more
product. The ones that tried to create sandboxes went broke.

Have a good day. Great spring weather here, hope it's good where you
are, too. :-)

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
You are who you intend to be. (Kurt Vonnegut)
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what Wolf K graced us with on 5/28/2019
3:21 PM:

> On 2019-05-28 15:09, Sailfish wrote:
>> My bloviated meandering follows what Don Spam's Reckless Son graced us
>> with on 5/28/2019 11:30 AM:
>>> Sailfish 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.
>>>>
>>>> Also, I always preferred W3C documentation over WHATWG's.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The article indicates that the named browser vendors had cooperated
>>> to produce their own standard because they did not like the one W3C
>>> had come up with.
>>> That is not necessarily a bad thing, you know the saying "A camel is
>>> a horse designed by a committee"?  I have no idea what camel W3C came
>>> up with but if the browser vendows refuse to implement it, I'd assume
>>> there was something fundamentally wrong with it.
>>>
>> Point taken but whole reason W3C came about was due to the Wild West
>> browserisms implemented by different vendors, e.q., (Microsoft marquee
>> tag, Netscape Layer tag, &c) and while most of the browser 'players'
>> are using Apple-developed Webkit engine, Google ditch Apple's version
>> and create their own.
>>
>> I'm not lamenting it, just expecting more incompatibilities to creep
>> in as the media continues to evolve.
>>
>
> Standards are necessary, the only themes worth discussing are which
> ones. interoperability and safety are primary, convenience is nice to
> have. Esthetics, kewlness, etc and so on so forth are whatever the
> vendor wants so long as they don't compromise safety, interoperability
> or convenience.
>
They are. However, when developing in an environment that's as fluid as
a raging river and as competitive as a honey badger, the lure of the
competing players will be too tempting not to bulk-up the
incompatibilities like battle bots in hopes of becoming the king of the
hill, e.g., Betamax vs. VHS, BluRay vs. HD-DVD, &c. There will be blood :-)

> Model: the NMRA's Standards and Recommended Practices, which have made
> model trains about as nearly plug'n'play as toys can be. The vendors
> realised early on that by following these standards they could sell more
> product. The ones that tried to create sandboxes went broke.
>
> Have a good day. Great spring weather here, hope it's good where you
> are, too. :-)
>
Yes, it's been an unusually wet winter and into spring in California,
the Everdrought state, it's welcomed news. That is, as long as the
flooding doesn't decide to rear its head and flash flood the damn state.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

»Q«
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what »Q« graced us with on 5/29/2019
7:47 AM:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>
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 :-)

> 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.
>
+1

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 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!

Haha :)

Not many people seemed to go for implanting chips under their skin, but
the beauty* of (D)ARPA's greatest invention is that it works around all
resistance and will get inside a lot of people eventually.  

* I mean horror.

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Don Spam's Reckless Son
Don Spam's Reckless Son wrote:
> The article indicates that the named browser vendors had cooperated to
> produce their own standard because they did not like the one W3C had
> come up with.
> That is not necessarily a bad thing, you know the saying "A camel is a
> horse designed by a committee"?

A camel is a horse with add-ons, or extensions if you like.
Which isn't necessarily bad.

-p

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

WaltS48-9
In reply to this post by »Q«
On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>

Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed to be
the home for documentation?

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>

I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might look later.

--
OS: Ubuntu Linux 18.04LTS - Gnome Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on 5/29/2019
1:43 PM:

> On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:
>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>>
>
> Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed to be
> the home for documentation?
>
> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>
>
> I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might look later.
>
I recall them announcing that as couple of years back:
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/

but haven't read much about it since then. Is it just me or is there one
major player, and a big one, that isn't included in that announcement?

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

WaltS48-9
On 5/29/19 10:06 PM, Sailfish wrote:

> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on 5/29/2019
> 1:43 PM:
>> On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:
>>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>>>
>>
>> Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed to
>> be the home for documentation?
>>
>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>
>>
>> I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might look
>> later.
>>
> I recall them announcing that as couple of years back:
> https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/ 
>
>
> but haven't read much about it since then. Is it just me or is there one
> major player, and a big one, that isn't included in that announcement?
>

Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".

--
OS: Ubuntu Linux 18.04LTS - Gnome Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on 5/30/2019
7:57 AM:

> On 5/29/19 10:06 PM, Sailfish wrote:
>> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on
>> 5/29/2019 1:43 PM:
>>> On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:
>>>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>>>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed to
>>> be the home for documentation?
>>>
>>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>
>>>
>>> I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might look
>>> later.
>>>
>> I recall them announcing that as couple of years back:
>> https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/ 
>>
>>
>> but haven't read much about it since then. Is it just me or is there
>> one major player, and a big one, that isn't included in that
>> announcement?
>
> Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
>
Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung and
NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

»Q«
In <news:[hidden email]>,
Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote:

> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on
> 5/30/2019 7:57 AM:
> > On 5/29/19 10:06 PM, Sailfish wrote:  
> >> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on
> >> 5/29/2019 1:43 PM:  
> >>> On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:  
> >>>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> >>>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
> >>>
> >>> Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed
> >>> to be the home for documentation?
> >>>
> >>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>
> >>>
> >>> I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might
> >>> look later.
> >>>  
> >> I recall them announcing that as couple of years back:
> >> https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/ 
> >>
> >>
> >> but haven't read much about it since then. Is it just me or is
> >> there one major player, and a big one, that isn't included in that
> >> announcement?  
> >
> > Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
> >  
> Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung
> and NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?

I went poking around Apple's web site for web developer documentation
but I only found docs aimed at iOS-app developers.  I dunno, but maybe
Apple just doesn't give a rats' about helping web developers?  

Does Safari come with the kind of dev tools Firefox and Chrome do?

[note to self: never type "developers" more than once in the same post,
as it conjures up images of Ballmer]

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

PietB-2
In reply to this post by Sailfish-4
Sailfish wrote:
> WaltS48 wrote:
>> Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
>>
> Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung
> and NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?

No. Read the ZDnet article: Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla.
And it may not be long before Huawei browser is the best one in town.

-p

_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

WaltS48-9
On 5/31/19 5:33 AM, PietB wrote:

> Sailfish wrote:
>> WaltS48 wrote:
>>> Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
>>>
>> Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung
>> and NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?
>
> No. Read the ZDnet article: Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla.
> And it may not be long before Huawei browser is the best one in town.
>
> -p
>

We are now discussing the Mozilla blog post about MDN being the go to
source for web developer documentation in place of the W3C and WHATWG
documentation.

<https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/>

I suppose the ZDnet article could indicate that Apple is contributing to
the MDN documentation.

--
OS: Ubuntu Linux 18.04LTS - Gnome Desktop
https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/get-involved/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
In reply to this post by PietB-2
My bloviated meandering follows what  graced us with on 5/31/2019 2:33 AM:

> Sailfish wrote:
>> WaltS48 wrote:
>>> Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
>>>
>> Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung
>> and NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?
>
> No. Read the ZDnet article: Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla.
> And it may not be long before Huawei browser is the best one in town.
>
PietB, what Walt said above. My response was in reply to Walt's question
as to whether Mozilla's MDN had taken over responsibility for
documenting web standards. To me, it seems unlikely considering that
Apple, the original webKit developer, was left off their announcement.

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

»Q«
In <news:-[hidden email]>,
Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Apple, the original webKit developer,

Only if forking KHTML/KJS counts as originating. ;)


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
In reply to this post by »Q«
My bloviated meandering follows what »Q« graced us with on 5/30/2019
7:46 PM:

> In <news:[hidden email]>,
> Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on
>> 5/30/2019 7:57 AM:
>>> On 5/29/19 10:06 PM, Sailfish wrote:  
>>>> My bloviated meandering follows what WaltS48 graced us with on
>>>> 5/29/2019 1:43 PM:  
>>>>> On 5/29/19 10:47 AM, »Q« wrote:  
>>>>>> In <news:[hidden email]>,
>>>>>> Sailfish <[hidden email]> 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.
>>>>> Pardon my ignorance but wasn't Mozilla Developer Network supposed
>>>>> to be the home for documentation?
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't recall when or where I read about that decision. Might
>>>>> look later.
>>>>>  
>>>> I recall them announcing that as couple of years back:
>>>> https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2017/10/18/mozilla-brings-microsoft-google-w3c-samsung-together-create-cross-browser-documentation-mdn/ 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> but haven't read much about it since then. Is it just me or is
>>>> there one major player, and a big one, that isn't included in that
>>>> announcement?  
>>> Apple? WHATWG? It does say "other industry leaders".
>>>  
>> Apple was the one I meant. To mention Google, Microsoft and Samsung
>> and NOT Apple suggests a lot, no?
>
> I went poking around Apple's web site for web developer documentation
> but I only found docs aimed at iOS-app developers.  I dunno, but maybe
> Apple just doesn't give a rats' about helping web developers?  
>
Or maybe they're really pi$$'d at Google for forking the WebCore from
webKit and is saying, the hell with 'em'? :-)

> Does Safari come with the kind of dev tools Firefox and Chrome do?
>
Since Safari based off of the open source webkit engine, web standards
would seem to flow from that. As far as MacOS development docs, wouldn't
their Xcode IDE doc cover their software development documentation?

> [note to self: never type "developers" more than once in the same post,
> as it conjures up images of Ballmer]
>
The cojured images, “Oh, the humanity!”

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Sailfish-4
In reply to this post by »Q«
My bloviated meandering follows what »Q« graced us with on 5/31/2019
1:54 PM:
> In <news:-[hidden email]>,
> Sailfish <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Apple, the original webKit developer,
>
> Only if forking KHTML/KJS counts as originating. ;)
>
Touché heh

--
Sailfish
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12