Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by prmoustache 1277 days ago
Or you could deem illegal to not follow iso/ietf/w3c unless it is already in a proposal stage.

We may not have the internet we have today but I am not sure it would be for the worse. Some things would have probably slowed down, we may had also avoided the terrible flash/activex/javawebapp period but companies may had pushed for html5 earlier through standardisation process.
2 comments
sokoloff 1277 days ago
No one is going to wait to debate how to do TCP, DNS, or SMTP in an RFC process while not sending bits over the wire.

Most of the core IETF RFCs/BCPs are standardization of things already created. “Prior implementation and testing” is an explicit goal of the IETF process, so I guess you could argue that you’re following that process automatically by creating the initial non-standardized implementation.

link
prmoustache 1277 days ago
That is why I mention that you could deploy it if at least there is a documented proposal.
link
sokoloff 1277 days ago
How would having a published proposal for flash/activeX/Java web app/foobar have avoided those? A company could crank out a draft proposal in a couple of afternoons.

I worked with the author of RFC 1149. He said it didn’t take him long at all to execute it.

link
brookst 1277 days ago
HTML5 would not have existed without flash.

Your idea to outlaw imperfect solutions is noble, but misses the fact that mature solutions learn from earlier, imperfect work.

If we’re fining or jailing people for releasing and/or using hacked together code, it either means no progress or rubber-stamp standards bodies that approve everything.

And I feel a little sorry for 13-year-old me, who presumably you would have treated harshly for releasing some BBS software that saw wide adoption when I “should have” invented IPv6 instead.

link