Very cool idea, though I think we're a long way away from this. Hopefully they file bugs on the specs when they find ambiguities.
Also the specs are written to define observable behavior, and there's a fair bit of ambiguity that's UA defined, but to be actually compatible with the Web requires doing what Chrome does.
The good news is that you can look at the source of the 3 major engines (and Ladybird!) and your AI agent can do comparisons and figure out optimizations.
I think finding bugs and ambiguities in the spec is actually the highest value thing anyone can do for W3C right now. 17 years after the first draft, we're still finding Flexbox Level 1 ambiguities, and this it still hasn't exited Candidate Recommendation (stage 2 out of 4).
esprehn · · focus · HN ↗
Also the specs are written to define observable behavior, and there's a fair bit of ambiguity that's UA defined, but to be actually compatible with the Web requires doing what Chrome does.
The good news is that you can look at the source of the 3 major engines (and Ladybird!) and your AI agent can do comparisons and figure out optimizations.
cyberrock · · focus · HN ↗