| 05:48 | <annevk> | Without multiple implementations it’s not really a standard |
| 07:36 | <MikeSmith> | and competition among browser projects has been a big factor in driving innovations and improvements |
| 07:37 | <MikeSmith> | concrete example is the case of JavaScript engines |
| 13:53 | <devsnek> | how often do things that "need implementer interest" become actual features |
| 13:54 | <devsnek> | I would imagine if a feature doesn't start out with one of the browsers pushing for it it's already dead |
| 13:59 | <nox> | devsnek: There are plenty of DOM methods which were introduced after libs mentioned they would be useful for their code. |
| 13:59 | <nox> | (AFAIK.) |
| 14:00 | <devsnek> | I'm just noticing that these issues on the html repo go back to 2015 |
| 14:00 | <devsnek> | im wondering how I can make sure that doesn't happen with mine :) |
| 14:00 | <annevk> | devsnek: it varies, I don't think implementers actively crawl them, so reaching out to folks can help |
| 14:00 | <Ms2ger> | Convince people or try to write an initial implementation yourself, I suppose |
| 14:01 | <annevk> | devsnek: https://whatwg.org/faq#adding-new-features |
| 14:01 | <annevk> | devsnek: it's a long process too; 3 years wouldn't be too bad |
| 14:01 | <devsnek> | yea I realize that |
| 14:01 | <devsnek> | 3 years sounds nice if stuff is happening |
| 14:05 | <devsnek> | I assumed more of the whatwg people would actually be working for the implementers |
| 14:12 | <annevk> | Quite a few do, but they don't necessarily decide what to work on |