8000 Add a section on "Risky changes" to the working mode by domenic · Pull Request #253 · whatwg/sg · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

Add a section on "Risky changes" to the working mode #253

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 26, 2025
Merged

Add a section on "Risky changes" to the working mode #253

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
739b279
Add a section on "Risky changes" to the working mode
domenic May 23, 2025
a3e0920
Per code review
domenic Sep 26, 2025
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
Prev Previous commit
Per code review
  • Loading branch information
@domenic
domenic committed Sep 26, 2025
commit a3e09209dbfa1027561d083a4265e57a682012ba
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion Working Mode.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ To balance between having the standard reflect agreed-upon changes, and avoiding

EXAMPLE: [Escape "<" and ">" when serializing attribute values](https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/6362) was merged once it became clear that all implementations were moving toward shipping, even before the change had reached any implementation's stable channel.

* If multiple implementers are supportive of the change, but only a single implementation is taking the lead by shipping it, then it's best to wait until there's a deployed implementation that's seen significant user testing before merging into the standard.
* If multiple implementers are supportive of the change, but only a single implementation is taking the lead by shipping it, then it's best to wait until there's at least one deployed implementation that's seen significant user testing before merging into the standard.

EXAMPLE: [Removing mutation events](https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/10573) had support from all implementations, but was not merged until Chromium had shipped the behavior to its stable channel users [for a month](https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/305#issuecomment-2302407051). Even then, we kept the tracking issue open until [Chromium removed some mechanisms](https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/305#issuecomment-2779845660) that allowed sites to opt back in to mutation events.

Expand Down
0