"It has to be Chromium" - eviltoast
  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why do you believe Google would not be able to ignore the WHATWG the same way they could ignore other standards organizations if they controlled the entire browser market?

    • jarfil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, for starters the WHATWG listens to Google, not the other way around. And yeah, they do “control” the entire “browser market”, or more precisely, the part they care about: how to show ads.

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s one way of seeing it.

          I don’t agree with the W3C or IEEE defining the standards anymore, or with Chromium becoming a “de facto” standard; the whole point of creating the WHATWG was to explicitly ditch the W3C, make Chromium into the basis for a living standard… and everyone clapped (except for some die hards who didn’t get the memo).

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, I see, I was just trying to list some examples of such standardization bodies I’m talking about. Don’t view it as some implicit approval over others I didn’t mention.