And then we kind of iron out all the details inside stage 2, and then stage 3 is time for everyone to start shipping it and implementing it, and, you know, at that point usually only expect changes when you couldn't have possibly anticipated something sooner than that. the time you ship it and then stage 4 is, you know, sort of the, you know, mission accomplished banner is when you actually merge it into the specification and becomes official.
And as far as how you know when proposals are coming, there's lots of places you can look, you can, you know, you can certainly read the notes for each meeting, which are long and very archaic, but are not archaic, obscure, but you can, you can read those which are published about 10 days after every meeting. But we also have the proposals repository on github dc39 slash proposals, and that's typically updated, like throughout the meeting, and so you can kind of browse the list of proposals at each stage. And each one will link to its own repository where you can ask questions or, you know, read about the proposal.
Okay, well, so the next question, I'm actually going to ask Maggie back. How can a person make a business case for their organization to get involved with DC 39 and other web standards. Sure. So, there's a there's kind of an underlying question there, of course, which is, how does anyone get involved with DC 39 and web standards, and it's worth noting that officially to participate in the DC 39 process, you need to be with an ACMA member company so ACMA is this standards or international standards organization. It centers a lot of things, not just JavaScript. There's a whole bunch of IoT standards, wearable standards, there's quite a lot of stuff in ACMA and to technically to participate in TC 39, you would be a delegate of a member organization. So, Microsoft is a member organization to TC 39, and there is a membership fee. So, what it comes down to is, if you want to be an official delegate, you need to get your organization to decide this is worth it for them. I think it's interesting, obviously, at Microsoft where we have like a browser, and TypeScript and stuff, we have a pretty vested business case for involvement in TC 39. But a lot of organizations have gotten involved, and I think it comes down to finding the thing that really matters. You know, when I first brought Temporal, I didn't realize how much help I would get from Bloomberg, who had just joined ECMA. And the reality was that Bloomberg was feeling a really strong business need when you think about the kind of business that Bloomberg runs to have a great date time API. And so that was, I think, you know, one of the major drivers of them coming to the table, not that I want to speak for your company. But I think it's finding that place where your business sees a gap and really, you know, sees a need to advance, whether that's in the performance space, where there's APIs, that you think that that you're missing. I also think that there's a lot of there's an argument to be made for goodwill, for community involvement for saying we want to be good community players and something that we use so much. But the biggest thing is finding that case where you're like, you know, this is critical path to the product that we make and we can be better through the standards process.
I guess the next question we'll go with, this one's going back to Jordan, is what are some of the challenges of standardizing the language in the long term, especially you're talking about the yearly spec updates, especially given the yearly spec updates. Yeah, I mean, so one of the bigger precepts that the committee has is don't break the web. The canonical example we always use is the Space Jam movie website from 95. I think that it is, it's very difficult to design a good programming language anyway. And there's a lot of programming languages to look at for both good things and mistakes. And it is extra difficult when that design is constrained by every decision you've made in the past, right? We can't just like make a new version of JavaScript, we have to keep the web that we already have. So that's a really big challenge, and there's a lot of things that we decide to do, not because we would have done it if we were designing it from scratch, but because like, it is the most sensible evolution for the most sensible evolution from the current state of the language to the next place we want to take it. I think that the yearly spec updates have actually been really beneficial. Some years there's many things and some years there's very little things.
Comments