First off, this is a community group &quot;specification,&quot; which is to say, it&#x27;s part of a W3C process that&#x27;s supposed to be easier for lay community members to be involved--and easier for people who have no clue about implementation issues to hijack the process [1]. So I decided to do some digging to see how involved actual browser vendors were in the process...<p>The backstory seems to involve a very, very acrimonious community split. See <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;manu.sporny.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;browser-api-incubation-antipattern&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;manu.sporny.org&#x2F;2016&#x2F;browser-api-incubation-antipatte...</a> (it&#x27;s a biased view, and I haven&#x27;t researched alternative viewpoints).<p>As far as I can untangle, the community group here decided they wanted to dictate to browser vendors what they should implement, complete with philosophical viewpoints. The working group that actually has traction with browser vendors and is likely to implement doesn&#x27;t appear to be paying too much attention to this, and the community group seems unwilling to engage with the browser vendors meaningfully.<p>In short, this is unlikely to go anywhere.<p>[1] It should be noted that regular WGs are also amenable to this capture (e.g., the XHTML work that ended up with all the browser vendors quitting).