[motorest]

...or it's a design by committee thing, and some people in the room are doing their best to preserve current and future tracking technology.

[bilekas]

It's exactly this, there is a group who come together and never agree on rules, but when they do, they never enforce them. It's I believe the definition of a paper tiger, sadly. A great idea executed horribly.

[__alexs]

Standards bodies rarely enforce rules themselves.

[squigz]

Is it really on the W3C to enforce standards? How would that even work?

[chasd00]

if they had a clear test that declares a site w3c compliant or not with no wiggle room then they could work with something like the ADA or other accessibility related standards and make w3c compliance required for ADA compliance.

[lukan]

By shipping their own reference browser ..

[squigz]

In what way would that enforce standards?

[lukan]

Well, the same way google can enforce their standards via chrome.

(I did not say it is a realistic goal for a theoretical comitee)

[victorbjorklund]

The only reason Chrome can do that is because it has a huge chunk of the market. It does not work for a browser with no users.

[echoangle]

So not at all? Shipping something in chrome isn’t enforcing a standard in my opinion. Enforcing a standard would be a regulatory thing, like having to use USB-C in certain situations.

[motorest]

> A great idea executed horribly.

No. It's sabotage.

[1oooqooq]

exactly.

i don't understand how everyone ignores that w3c is mostly staffed by companies in adtech.

their goal is to keep adtech viable and profitable. Microsoft with ie, and then google with chrome, are just extra pushes to this end. but the main effort is w3c.

disclaimer: was one of the aforementioned grunts in a more naive life.