Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove harmful stage 1 polyfill recommendation #33

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: gh-pages
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Remove harmful stage 1 polyfill recommendation #33

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1fbf3fb
Remove harmful stage 1 polyfill recommendation
ljharb Dec 17, 2021
a6ffd8d
fixup
ljharb Dec 18, 2021
e8f0af9
fixup
ljharb Dec 18, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ <h2>Stages</h2>
</td>
<td>None
<td>Major
<td>Polyfills / demos
<td>Demos and experimental reference implementations (implementations that modify global built-in objects should not be published as libraries or used in production-deployed code; implementations that do not modify global built-in objects may be published)
Copy link

@js-choi js-choi Dec 18, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Moving this to a new conversation: I also think the “Experimental” in Stage 2 should be further clarified to:

Experimental engine implementations and other reference implementations (implementations still should not conditionally modify global objects using feature detection)

I think redundancy for the sake of clarity is desirable in this case. The word “Experimental” alone in this column for Stage 2 no longer makes sense, since Stage 1 now also uses the word “experimental” in the same column.

</tr>
<tr>
<td>2
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ <h2>Stages</h2>
<td>The solution is complete and no further work is possible without implementation experience, significant usage and external feedback.
<td>Complete: all semantics, syntax and API are completed described
<td>Limited: only those deemed critical based on implementation experience
<td>Spec compliant
<td>Spec-compliant polyfills, engines, and any other implementations (implementations that modify global built-in objects may be tentatively published)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should reference the w3c on this: https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/polyfills/#feature-life-cycle-and-the-role-of-polyfills and if this is ambiguous, highlight that polyfills are only recommended to be shipped after browsers have shipped. This covers a lot of the issues that come up.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! I love the idea of linking here and also highlighting that recommendation, and that matches what we discussed in plenary.

</tr>
<tr>
<td>4
Expand Down