1 What WG?

As far as I’m aware, the WHATWG’s economic model is that a lot of the ‘volunteers’ are actually vendor backed (Apple, Mozilla, Opera, at least).

WebKit evolution kind of falls between the two stools – a lot of the changes are proposed HTML5 and CSS3 recommendations, implemented as a fair accompli. With Google on-board this is only likely to get worse / better (depending on if you think it’s actually a good thing).

We do need to consider if we actually want all the powers of Flash/Silverlight in our web standards, seeing as that equally means all the annoyances (anything that allows non-user initiated actions to take place is going to be abused, but equally, if we exclude them, web standards will always fall behind plug-ins).

posted at 03:30 pm on September 23, 2008 by Julian Lawton

2 On a collaborative approach

In my 10 years of designing and coding web pages I have never felt that the w3c was anything other than recommendations which are ‘forced down’ on the community. At no time has it felt collaborative or open. I believe an approach of openness could lead to much greater participation/adoption of those very standards.

In a more collaborative model, to avoid the “too many cooks” scenario could a central group be set up to put forward recommendations of new standards and then a consortium of users (open and free to register) vote on the web as to which standards should be implemented/realised.

This might also give propietry plug in vendors a much better forum for pitching their new products to the web community at large, and having them adopted into the community.

posted at 03:53 pm on September 23, 2008 by Al Stevens

3 Solid Article

Thanks a lot for a well written and thought provoking article! It definitely spells out clearly a lot of the underlying problems in the current web standards movement. I can tell right now I’m going to be spending the better part of my day pondering it.

posted at 03:57 pm on September 23, 2008 by Gene Davison

4 We need the W3C

Some interesting points raised in this article, especially pertaining to the ‘revolutionary’ independent working groups like WaSP and WHATWG.

I don’t think it can be stressed enough however how important the W3C is in terms of ensuring some sort of semblance and cohesion amongst the larger players in the development of the web. To ensure the web doesn’t trip over a myriad array of disperate and non-related technologies we need some official body to at least attempt to steer the ship. I think if the W3C was dispanded we would see major cracks appear in the development of the web. True, it is a behemoth of an organisation that suffers from protracted discussions and agreement schedules but it’s better to refine the organisation as time goes on then try to build it again. Some of the work the W3C has achieved is impressive and I have to agree with Molly that the finger should pointed to them last in the blame game.

posted at 04:08 pm on September 23, 2008 by Loughlin McSweeney

5 W3C is Appreciated

I’m concerned that HTML is page based and we are stuffing applications (Ajax…Flash) into these pages. These applications don’t follow Web Standards and aren’t accessible to screen readers that read HTML pages. I just wonder if the W3C will be able to handle creating better guidelines for these nonstandard apps. Is the current browser model becoming obsolete and is the W3C trying to make an older technology creep forward when it really needs to be replaced.

I am thankful for all the W3C’s efforts. They have made my job as an interactive designer easier and I have learned a lot.

posted at 04:22 pm on September 23, 2008 by Stephen Crawford

6 So What Else Is New?

I’m left unclear as to exactly what problem(s) Holzschlag is complaining about other than a feeling of frustration and lack of influence. (Sorry.)
The areas of “interoperability” – CSS, HTML5, that in no way compromise browser-makers’ competitive standing will continue to expand (constrained, always constrained in practice, by the “attrition rate” at which the user-base upgrades their browsers) and areas of proprietary technology that give browser-makers some sort of competitive advantage (Flash, Silverlight) will likewise expand.
And so, we juggle.
The main thing is to ensure that Microsoft acts responsibly.

And apropros of that, as an aside – it amazes me how few give a damn.
Example: For the past six months or so, since IE8 Beta 1 was released, the IE dev team has held a monthly online chat. Anybody can log in and get “face time” with platform architect Chris Wilson and company.
Average attendance? About twenty five to thirty people by my count.
Keep preaching, by all means, but have no illusions about getting the choir to sing.

posted at 04:37 pm on September 23, 2008 by Richard Fink

7 Missing Element: Inertia

Ms. Holzschlag’s article downplays the key obstacle to standards adoption: the colossal, entrenched population of the near-permanent IE6 base.

We are stuck with coding around this most-truculent user base for at least the next decade, and there is no obvious path to pry loose this browser from the significant population that will never click an “update” button.

Workgroups, conferences, and committees can convene, but I don’t think this stumbling point can be removed by an edict from the W3C. I wish I could be less of a pessimist about this, but I believe this is why web standards fail now, and will fail in the future.

posted at 04:53 pm on September 23, 2008 by Jim O'Kane

8 Making progress on a smaller scale

Here in Cleveland we’ve started our own grassroots organization, the Cleveland Web Standards Association. While we may not have a lot of pull with huge companies that work with the W3C, we can try to make changes locally and push Ohio businesses and academic institutions towards standards and away from proprietary technologies. While this doesn’t solve the larger problem of how we move forward with recommendations, at least it grows the base of people who care.

My feeling is if enough people are passionate and vocal about something, they can push even Microsoft in the right direction. (For example: backpedalling after the public outcry over IE and standards mode) Baby steps.

posted at 04:56 pm on September 23, 2008 by Beth Dean

9 simple

as a developer, i’ve always wanted to code the “right” way because it’s impressive to myself and my colleagues when you can create semantic well-formed code. I think keeping html and javascript the way they are encourages the best of us to create new libraries to share methods of code creation. It just doesn’t seem productive unless all of the players are working on a way to make 1px equal 1px across the board. I just want to stop having to spend hours adjusting css to accommodate these different browsers. If you’re not doing that, you’re just getting in the way, and wasting lots of money in France.
The decision you make when choosing a browser should be about features, load speed, and other personal preferences, but it definitely should not require ridiculous amounts of adjustments – to the point of writing stylesheets in completely different ways – to get a page to work for the select browsers my company requires compatibility (which may be a different set than your company).

posted at 05:32 pm on September 23, 2008 by Fred Epner

10 3 Cirlces of Hell:

I’m sorry, every web developer I know has three circles of hell, and they are all the same: IE6, IE7, and in some minor cases still IE5.5.

Had Microsoft not taken a 5 year sabbatical from updating their browser, which just happens to be forced upon millions of users who can’t switch to something better (thank you corporate IT departments), we wouldn’t be in the predicament that we are in today.

The sooner that IE8 is released and becomes a participant in the current web standards (CSS2.1 + 3), the sooner we can forget the long, international nightmare that was Internet Explorer in the new millenium. Firefox, Safari, and Opera have all done their part to advance the web and adhere to standards (not perfect, mind you, but a million times better than MS). It’s time Microsoft do the same.

posted at 06:54 pm on September 23, 2008 by Ted Lee