[whatwg] Technical Parity with W3C HTML Spec

Mike Shaver mike.shaver at gmail.com
Fri Jun 25 15:15:53 PDT 2010

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com> wrote:
>> How
>> can one learn of the technical motivations of decisions such as the
>> change to require ImageData for Canvas,
> On the WHATWG wiki a Rationale page is being assembled by a volunteer
> (don't know their name, but they go by 'variable' in #whatwg) to
> document the reasoning behind various decisions that come up in
> questions.  Beyond that, mailing-list diving.

In the case of the ImageData change, I can't find any proposal made to
the list prior to the spec being altered, but I will dive anew.

> There can
> sometimes be a significant delay between something being proposed and
> this happening, though, so within that timespan things can be
> discussed without the "incumbent advantage" you talk about.

That only works if changes are proposed via the mailing list, and it
relies on meaningful delay.  If my recollection of the original
additions of SQL databases and web workers is correct, there was very
little such delay, certainly relative to the scale of content.

Are you describing how you think the WHATWG has committed to work, how
it does work, or how you think it should work?


More information about the whatwg mailing list