On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Eric Rescorla <e...@rtfm.com> wrote: > > I'm going to refer you at this point to the W3C HTML design principles of > priority of constituencies > (http://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies). > > "In case of conflict, consider users over authors over implementors over > specifiers over theoretical purity. In other words costs or difficulties to > the user should be given more weight than costs to authors; which in turn > should be given more weight than costs to implementors; which should be > given more weight than costs to authors of the spec itself, which should be > given more weight than those proposing changes for theoretical reasons > alone. Of course, it is preferred to make things better for multiple > constituencies at once." > > Again, we're happy to look at ways to ease this transition, but right now > you're not offering any. > You've set out on a course that leaves no room to offer any. You're going to break things. You've decided to break things and damn the consequences. You've decided to synchronize breaking things so that users have no UA to flee to. And you've decided to hide your breaking of things so that the shitstorm isn't going to come all at once. You're trying to delegate the cost to fix things you broke for users, to authors, which in many cases cannot burden that cost, even if they wanted to.
I, as an author, tell you that this isn't going to go over smoothly. In fact, it's going to go over pretty terribly badly. Coercing everybody to conform with your greater goal (tm) from a situation where many cannot comply always does. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
