
TC39: Open and Incremental Approach Improves Standards Process - fagnerbrack
https://www.sitepen.com/blog/2017/04/06/tc39-open-and-incremental-approach-improves-standards-process
======
mstade
The TC39 process isn't perfect, but it's definitely _much_ better than what it
used to be. Particularly, the effort to bring discussions into light and
provide the ability to engage in the development of the various proposals[1]
has – I believe – really improved the state of affairs. Mailing lists are a
terrible format for this I think. A clear definition of the stages[2] also
doesn't hurt. Recently, a decision was made to ensure all stage 1 proposals
(i.e. anything above strawmen) are migrated to the TC39 repo[3], which is I
think a good example of how the process is incrementally improved. This is
easily the kind of thing that could've been discussed and decided upon behind
closed doors, but instead it's in the open for anyone to read and get
involved. Kudos.

Unfortunately, the same can't necessarily be said for the other bodies. WHATWG
for instance may put things online and discuss things in the open, but unless
you're an editor or one of the blessed few I get the distinct feeling that
your contributions are more of a nuisance than anything else, making the whole
thing look like process theatre to me. I may well be wrong, but that's my
impression. (Note: I haven't been personally affected by this, it's just my
impression from reading the discussion on various WHATWG specs.)

[1]: [https://github.com/tc39/proposals](https://github.com/tc39/proposals)

[2]: [https://tc39.github.io/process-document](https://tc39.github.io/process-
document)

[3]:
[https://github.com/tc39/proposals/issues/44](https://github.com/tc39/proposals/issues/44)

