I guess this is the real thing: https://github.com/extensibleweb/manifesto/blob/...

lomnakkus · on Jan 4, 2016

That's a little closer, but AFAICT it's just a bunch of added "signatories" -- again from a skim-read.

In the long run, WebAssembly may be it. As of the promised-1.0 it's just a way/excuse to run C/C++ code on the browser's VM with some GL/Canvas mixed in there. I mean, I understand marketing a FPS-game-in-the-browser as the be-all and end-all thing, but that's not my market or end game :).

It'll be really interesting to see what happens with WebAssembly 1.1, 1.2, 2.x... Will they be the ones to surmount the insurountable obstacles?

(I've been around for quite a long time in the industry, so... having learned things and just how much the last 20% takes, I tend to temper my optimism quite a bit.)

magicalist · on Jan 4, 2016

That is it (and there's quite a bit of thought in those bullet points), but not sure what you're looking for.

It's a manifesto for how to approach writing standards for the web, not a standard itself.

lomnakkus · on Jan 4, 2016

That's fair enough, but I guess I just don't think there's enough... commitment in that?

I appreciate the point about meta-standards vs. standards. I think I'm more looking for concrete technical standards (to obviate all others before them![1]) than meta-standards. The web has advanced significantly in the last few years, perhaps even as a result of this meta-standard, but ultimately I'm skeptical that competition between entities that don't have the same goal will "succeed"[2] in any objective sense. The point me be a a bit muddled at this point, but think "principal agent problem".

[1] Because that always works! (Find your own XKCD)

[2] Yeah, I know. Everybody has a different idea of what that means.