cwilso
commented
4 years ago (This response is my own personal opinion; it should not be read as the opinion of my employer, nor as the opinion of the Advisory Board.)
I'm not sure exactly what you mean. By the way I read your initial logic, any additional complexity would be decreasing individuals' control and power - when adding features like this is the exact opposite, as it increases their control over the platform. This proposal adds complexity for those who need it, but can be ignored if you don't, or don't wish to learn about it.
Similarly, it would appear that people on low bandwidth networks and low specification equipment are ALREADY at a disadvantage, and website publishers tend to abandon them - in part because they lack the API tools (such as client hints) to address these scenarios effectively. The goal in proposals such as this is to enable them to fix that.
But finally, and most importantly, I would point out that during its entire history, the Web has never had "mandatory standards" - the platform has grown as an interoperable agreement across many vendors; there is no body that CAN "mandate" any particular support. Indeed, as the Web platform grows, it needs to continue to interoperate across browsers, OSes and devices; that is a core principle, and frankly, the principal reason behind my own 27-year career in it.
As an incubation, there is little governance here, because this is not (at this point) an official standard of the W3C, or even on the track to become so (it would need to be a Recommendation-track deliverable of a Working Group).
jwrosewell
Devyn404
The complexity introduced increases the learning curve for "do-it-yourself" or "individual" developers' when improving performance or optimising their websites. This does not seem to align with Ethical Web Principle "The web must enhance individuals' control and power".
There is a similar concern regarding Ethical Web Principle "The web is for all people". People "on low bandwidth networks and low specification equipment" will be particularly disadvantaged if website publishers lack the skills or time to modify their websites. The proposal risks essential services needed by economically disadvantaged people becoming unavailable. The justification for such impacts must therefore be very high indeed.
In time it will also be important to ensure broad W3C membership support to comply with Ethical Web Principle "The web is multi-browser, multi-OS and multi-device". A route to making this a mandatory standard for all browsers is needed to avoid encouraging "the creation of websites that work only in one browser".
Overall, there are a set of policy and governance questions to resolve prior to any further engineering work being performed on this set of proposals.