W3C and WHATWG standoff: Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla object to DOM 4.1
As everyone knows, there are two HTML specifications: W3C (the World Wide Web Consortium ) and WHATWG (Apple, Google, Microsoft and Mozilla, the de facto authors of the HTML5 standard). This week between the creators of the specifications an open conflict took place.
The situation developed as follows. It all started with the fact that the W3C made a fork of the WHATWG DOM living standard specification and called it DOM 4.1. Then the W3C made incompatible changes to it and declared the fork the official specification, although in fact all the important work was done in the WHATWG version.
Some time passed, and a month ago, a public discussion of the proposal of the W3C to make the specification a Candidate Recommendation began (after it, significant changes are no longer made, only the details of the design are clarified in the PR, the recommendation is officially accepted). Read this informative discussion on Github at .
')
It is logical to assume that some W3C members have well-founded objections to the incompatibility of the two DOM versions. Here, the W3C CEO intervened in the matter, who entered into a dispute with them and rejected all their objections, advancing the specification to Candidate Recommendation (CR) status and announcing a call for consensus.
Of course, the WHATWG members did not like this turn of events. After the W3C director refused to change the specifications, these companies made a formal objection ( Formal Objection ) against DOM 4.1 a few days ago, promising the W3C that none of the browser engines are going to implement this specification - because two incompatible versions of DOM Neither developers nor users need it.
In its objection, Google pointed out specific technical incompatibility issues with the new W3C specification:
The question arises - why does W3C need all this? The fact is that, apart from the WHATWG members, the organization of the W3C consists of another 450 companies that do not have much influence on the world of browsers, but regularly bring income to W3C in the form of contributions. Last year, the W3C did a similar trick with DRM ( Encrypted Media Extensions ), which, from the words of Google engineer Jan Hickson , “it’s impossible to implement in practice” - in order to attract several companies to the consortium that until this point had no reason to sponsor the W3C.
The long-suffering W3C DOM 4.1 draft can be downloaded here . The very first version of the DOM specification was prepared by the W3C almost twenty years ago, on October 1, 1998. Links to objections: Mozilla objection, Apple objection, Microsoft objection, Google objection .
The situation developed as follows. It all started with the fact that the W3C made a fork of the WHATWG DOM living standard specification and called it DOM 4.1. Then the W3C made incompatible changes to it and declared the fork the official specification, although in fact all the important work was done in the WHATWG version.
Some time passed, and a month ago, a public discussion of the proposal of the W3C to make the specification a Candidate Recommendation began (after it, significant changes are no longer made, only the details of the design are clarified in the PR, the recommendation is officially accepted). Read this informative discussion on Github at .
')
It is logical to assume that some W3C members have well-founded objections to the incompatibility of the two DOM versions. Here, the W3C CEO intervened in the matter, who entered into a dispute with them and rejected all their objections, advancing the specification to Candidate Recommendation (CR) status and announcing a call for consensus.
Of course, the WHATWG members did not like this turn of events. After the W3C director refused to change the specifications, these companies made a formal objection ( Formal Objection ) against DOM 4.1 a few days ago, promising the W3C that none of the browser engines are going to implement this specification - because two incompatible versions of DOM Neither developers nor users need it.
In its objection, Google pointed out specific technical incompatibility issues with the new W3C specification:
Using incorrect Web IDL (Web Interface Definition Language), Event Dispatch incompatibilities, Shadow DOM integration, integration of individual elements, Ranges, and DOM tree traversalAs a result, W3C was forced to take a time out and promised to first consider technical problems, and then return to the adoption of DOM 4.1.
The question arises - why does W3C need all this? The fact is that, apart from the WHATWG members, the organization of the W3C consists of another 450 companies that do not have much influence on the world of browsers, but regularly bring income to W3C in the form of contributions. Last year, the W3C did a similar trick with DRM ( Encrypted Media Extensions ), which, from the words of Google engineer Jan Hickson , “it’s impossible to implement in practice” - in order to attract several companies to the consortium that until this point had no reason to sponsor the W3C.
The long-suffering W3C DOM 4.1 draft can be downloaded here . The very first version of the DOM specification was prepared by the W3C almost twenty years ago, on October 1, 1998. Links to objections: Mozilla objection, Apple objection, Microsoft objection, Google objection .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/353514/
All Articles