Go away, kid, you bother me: Apple, Google, Microsoft, Mozilla kick W3C nerds to the curb

Web standards body dressed down in spec spat


The organization that tries to advance web technology standards – the World Wide Web Consortium or W3C – has run into a roadblock: Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla.

Earlier this week, the four major browser makers expressed dissatisfaction with the W3C's DOM 4.1 specification, which defines a variety of new capabilities associated with the Document Object Model, through which web documents are described.

The specification – which is on its way to the Candidate Recommendation (CR) stage, a step in the process before formal approval – only has meaning if it is implemented in web browsers. And that's no longer a given.

The four formal objections to advancing the spec, filed as GitHub issues, underscore the fact the W3C no longer sets the web standards agenda.

That responsibility has shifted to the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group (WHATWG), a splinter group formed in 2004 by individuals from Apple, Mozilla, and Opera in response to the W3C's sluggish approach to standards development.

WHATWG has seen its influence grow over the years to eclipse the W3C, at least in terms of browser technology. As Mozilla principal engineer David Baron explained in 2014, "When the W3C's and WHATWG's HTML specifications differ, we tend to follow the WHATWG one."

With the W3C advancing DOM 4.1 to CR status, the organization's dwindling clout has become apparent. The browsers made by Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Mozilla account for more than 90 per cent of mobile and of desktop market share by some measures. If they act together, the technology they support becomes a de facto standard; and the technology they ignore is left in limbo.

That's where the W3C's DOM 4.1 proposal is now stuck.

Dead end

"[T]he current document cannot possibly exit [Candidate Recommendation], since no browser engine intends to implement it," said Apple WebKit engineer Maciej Stachowiak in voicing Apple's objection.

The problem for Apple, Google, Microsoft and Mozilla is that the W3C has forked the DOM 4.1 specification, making it differ from the WHATWG specification.

Therein lie compatibility problems. If browser makers continue to implement the WHATWG rules and encounter webpages build with W3C-approved DOM 4.1 tech, there will be blood, or at least mild annoyance when webpages fail to function properly.

"[T]he existence of different DOM standards creates pain for our engineers and customers," said Michael Champion, senior program manager for Microsoft, in outlining his employer's objections.

The W3C has more than 450 other members, but in the context of browsers, these other companies are largely bystanders. Nonetheless, many want a voice in shaping web technology and they pay for that privilege.

Last year, in a Reddit post, Ian Hickson, editor of the WHATWG spec and a Google engineer, offered his take on the differences between WHATWG and W3C.

Shouting match

WTF is up with the W3C, DRM and security bods threatened – we explain

READ MORE

Where WHATWG values technical precision, he said, the W3C "is an organization supported by large annual fees from large companies, and its primary organizational goal is to ensure these companies remain as paying members."

Hickson pointed to the W3C's approach to digital restrictions rights management (DRM aka Encrypted Media Extensions) – something opposed by many in the web community, but supported by W3C members with substantial interests in copyrighted content.

"DRM is a technology that is literally impossible to implement," he wrote. "Any DRM solution will always be broken, because there's just no way to simultaneously let someone decrypt content and prevent them from decrypting content, however much you obfuscate the keys. The W3C, however, is all-in on DRM, because by doing this they got a bunch of companies to join as members who wouldn't otherwise have had a reason to join."

The Register asked the W3C for comment but has not heard back. ®

Updated to add

In a statement, a W3C spokesperson told us:

The DOM specification was originated at W3C, with the first version being completed on October 1, 1998. W3C Members supported chartering the current Web Platform WG on August 3, 2017 to continue the work and develop standards for various specs including DOM 4.1. That work is continuing and the WG is currently debating the timing for transition to Candidate Recommendation. Several members have objected to moving forward this month and the WG Chairs are studying those objections.

In December 2017, the WHATWG (which has its own version of the DOM specification) announced a new Workmode for themselves. W3C noted in a blog post that they had met with the new WHATWG Steering Group and that they will work together to build a stronger partnership. Those discussions are still ongoing, and are being pursued in a parallel path to the spec work in WPWG.


Other stories you might like

  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading
  • Big Tech loves talking up privacy – while trying to kill privacy legislation
    Study claims Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft work to derail data rules

    Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft often support privacy in public statements, but behind the scenes they've been working through some common organizations to weaken or kill privacy legislation in US states.

    That's according to a report this week from news non-profit The Markup, which said the corporations hire lobbyists from the same few groups and law firms to defang or drown state privacy bills.

    The report examined 31 states when state legislatures were considering privacy legislation and identified 445 lobbyists and lobbying firms working on behalf of Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, and Microsoft, along with industry groups like TechNet and the State Privacy and Security Coalition.

    Continue reading
  • SEC probes Musk for not properly disclosing Twitter stake
    Meanwhile, social network's board rejects resignation of one its directors

    America's financial watchdog is investigating whether Elon Musk adequately disclosed his purchase of Twitter shares last month, just as his bid to take over the social media company hangs in the balance. 

    A letter [PDF] from the SEC addressed to the tech billionaire said he "[did] not appear" to have filed the proper form detailing his 9.2 percent stake in Twitter "required 10 days from the date of acquisition," and asked him to provide more information. Musk's shares made him one of Twitter's largest shareholders. The letter is dated April 4, and was shared this week by the regulator.

    Musk quickly moved to try and buy the whole company outright in a deal initially worth over $44 billion. Musk sold a chunk of his shares in Tesla worth $8.4 billion and bagged another $7.14 billion from investors to help finance the $21 billion he promised to put forward for the deal. The remaining $25.5 billion bill was secured via debt financing by Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Barclays, and others. But the takeover is not going smoothly.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022