Rarely do I find a need to call out the W3C folks (or anyone, for that matter), but the recent post by Daniel Glazman (@glazou), co-chair of the W3C CSS working group, pushed me over the edge.
In his article, he calls for everyone to, get this, stop using -webkit in their sites. He equates webkit, now a popular engine for most new mobile browsers, to IE6. Moreover, he calls it a “threat to the open web”.
Seriously?
This from the group responsible for years of delays in approving standards? Remember, these are the fine folks who for the past three years have cautioned web developers from using HTML5 (a term used a bit liberally to also include new CSS3, video, local storage, web sockets and other goodies) because they’re still working on drafts for it. Take the canvas tag, a webkit mainstay since 2005, which is still a W3C “working draft” — seven years later.
The only reason web developers are using these hot webkit (and gecko and now even internet explorer) features in the first place is we’re tired of waiting for this standards body to get off their collective ass and actually approve something.
Webkit is the new IE6? Really? If a vendor were to make a browser that only complied with approved W3C standards, you’d pretty much have IE6. So really, W3C itself is “the new IE6″.
For a representative of a non-profit organization to jump up and call for us to set our websites back 3-5 years is ridiculous. This is not a call to action, but a call for our inaction; to limit progress and the pursuit of competitive advantage in the name of some socialistic ideal created by a group who is even more monolithic in pace than in size. We’re talking a glacial, almost purposeful aim to slow innovation and plant a giant “STOP” sign in the evolution of the web.
In its glory, his article: CALL FOR ACTION: THE OPEN WEB NEEDS YOU *NOW*
Contrast this with the W3C’s hesitation to green light, well, pretty much anything cool to come along in web development in the past five years.
To Daniel Glazman, I propose you spend more time working with your group to approve specs and less time bickering and whining about webkit. The whole “problem” of browser vendors moving on without you starts with how the W3C works, and not with the vendors themselves. To try and shift the blame and rally people to a cause they don’t fully understand is irresponsible and reprehensible. I believe the industry term for his call to action is “a load of crap”.
He calls for people to stop using only
-webkit, which is a very different proposition.The folks using *only* -webkit (other than, say, Apple and Google) are from what I’ve seen only doing this in a mobile app context, where webkit is the dominant player. Developers like shortcuts, and adding other vendors for what is purely a mobile app or touch-friendly version of a site sounds nice in theory, but they’re not gonna do it without some numbers to rationalize it. I can’t think of a mobile device I’ve used where I went to a site and said “oh drat, these bastards don’t support gecko!”. Moreover, it’s not the responsibility of the W3C or any other body to dictate what the marketplace is sure to define. If some other mobile browser engine starts to gain traction in the “webkit” world of newer devices, you can bet that users will drive these changes away from pure -webkit, not the W3C.
He did not exactly say to stop using prefixes. He said not to design for webkit only, and to stop browser sniffing for webkit (ie. blocking the whole service if non-webkit is detected). You can still have your fancy CSS transitions.
I do like “So really, W3C itself is “the new IE6″.” though.
Remember that the standardization process is not easy, especially not in a time where browsers are moving so fast. They definitely do know what they are doing.
He’s dodging the fact that these vendor prefixes are required for features which have enough consensus (for years now) to finalize specs and stop requiring prefixes altogether. His militant approach and blame shifting is most what I take issue with. Also, many of the browser sniffing features are to support things like serving up cached web apps for mobile devices, so a blanket “no sniffing” statement is at this point in time a bit premature (sadly).
Having been part of a standards group, (Zeroconf), I am amazed that anyone bothers with them. Never in my life seen such dedication to making sure nothing changes faster than once a decade or so.
It’s not all standards bodies mind you. For example, the IEEE moves along at a decent pace. In 1999, they released 802.11b, which was 11Mbps wireless networking.
in the decade that followed, they moved from that to the current standard, 802.11n, which is over 100MBps, and less than three years later, they’re working on final approval of 802.11ac, which will quadruple that speed.
In the same period of time, the W3C has…oh wait, they haven’t HTML 5 is still just a working draft. The last XHTML standard was in 2001, and CSS 2.1 was issued in 2011.
The IETF is NOT much better, if at all.
Were the W3C working to REVERSE the progress of HTML, they’d not be able to do more damage.
[...] Urgent Call to Inaction from the W3C >> Webkit Developments [...]
[...] Urgent Call to Inaction from the W3C >> Webkit Developments [...]