Skip to content

Commit 059b864

Browse files
tabatkinsrobpalme
authored andcommitted
Clarify PoC
We've run into issues before in CSSWG where someone has interpreted the priority of constituencies in an overly-absolute manner. This sentence captures our use of the term, which has served us well.
1 parent f72de57 commit 059b864

File tree

1 file changed

+3
-1
lines changed

1 file changed

+3
-1
lines changed

terminology.md

Lines changed: 3 additions & 1 deletion
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -496,12 +496,14 @@ Some real-world examples:
496496

497497
The idea that when differing perspectives come into conflict, our decisions ought to prioritize them in the following (descending) order:
498498

499-
1. End users
499+
1. End users (tool and website users)
500500
2. JavaScript authors
501501
3. JavaScript engine implementers
502502
4. ECMAScript specification authors
503503
5. Theoretical purity
504504

505+
This ordering is not absolute; a small cost or benefit to a higher-priority group can be overridden by a sufficiently large cost or benefit to a lower-priority group.
506+
505507
While this is not an explicitly adopted goal of TC39, it is a common standards concept which delegates often refer to.
506508

507509
### References

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)