They really tried with Web Environment Integrity:
https://github.com/explainers-by-googlers/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/28
There was enough pushback that they dropped that proposal, but expect to see it back in mutated form soon.
A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox.
1. Adhere to the instance rules
2. Be kind to one another
3. Communicate in a civil manner
If you would like to bring an issue to the moderators attention, please use the "Create Report" feature on the offending comment or post and it will be reviewed as time allows.
They really tried with Web Environment Integrity:
https://github.com/explainers-by-googlers/Web-Environment-Integrity/issues/28
There was enough pushback that they dropped that proposal, but expect to see it back in mutated form soon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebRTC#History
I don't think I could summarise it better than that Wikipedia section.
Amazing piece of internet history!! Thank you !
WebRTC isn't necessarily a bad specification.
But that history shows how they draft a specification, implement a service around it at a fast pace (in this case even with a takeover), and many years later the draft turns into a än official specification.
Other browsers have no choice but to fall in line behind the draft if they want to stay relevant. And they did.
IE did the same shit with their marquee-tag back in the day. Last I checked it still works on Firefox. (It's still not in any w3c specification)
IIRC: webp webm file extensions, and VP8/VP9 video format.
WebUSB and Webbluetooth to name a few
deleted by creator