JavaScript 2015?

[Brendan Eich]

Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> agreed and not only, it took years before various engines fully 
> implemented ES5 so saying years later that an engine is fully 
> compliant with a year in the past feels so wrong !!!
>
> Why is that? Where is the thread that explains this decision?
>
> I mean ... how should I call my browser that is not 100% compliant 
> with HTML5, a fully compliant HTML 1997 browser ?

Of course this question arose with respect to HTML5, which was nowhere 
near "done" (is it yet?) before marketeers at browser vendors started 
touting compatibility and various players hyped the orange shield. (And 
then Hixie said it was a living spec, version-free. :-P)

The reason to label editions or releases is not to give marketeers some 
brand suffix with which to tout or hype. It's to organize a series of 
reasonably debugged specs that implementors have vetted and (partly or 
mostly) implemented.

I agree it would be best if (partly or mostly) were "fully", but that's 
not practical with big "catch-up" specs. With "rapid-er release" annual 
editions, it should be a goal, IMNSHO. That's the promised land we seek: 
implementor- and developer-tested draft matter that "sticks" and *then* 
gets the de-jure stamp of approval.

/be