Lotsa laughs

Didier PH Martin martind at netfolder.com
Tue May 25 20:14:10 BST 1999

Hi Chris,

you said:
> Three points

> a) You seemed to be asserting that Americans in general, (and the
> preponderence of them in W3C) made us incapable of producing
> internationalised specs and it was that which I was refuting
> b) RFC 2070 was used by the W3C HTML WG as part of the creation of HTML
> 4.0 and it was a requirement that HTML 4.0 be completely compliant with
> that RFC
> c) The authors all work for W3C member companies, or in one case for W3C
> itself. In the case of "now works for" I don't think that joining W3C
> made him suddenly less interested in Internationalisation; if anything,
> he had more time to devote to the subject.

I never said that american _cannot_ produce good international specs. Read
again my words and don't put in my keyboard things I never said. You came to
that conclusion yourself.
I am just questionning what the word "standard" really mean. And what is
really behind that word. This is because it seems that a lot of folks are
using this word like other previously used that word to support an opinion,
a religion, a market share.
I just replied to your example (a bad one). RFC are made under the auspices
of IETF and the IETF process or spec creation is not restricted to solely
consortium members who paid a fee. It does not show that W3C produces
international specs just that IETF does. But I said that I got your point,
you just picked the wrong example :-) (And I do not mean that W3C do not
make efforts to have a more international composition - Do you want me to
repeat it again, so I am sure you understand ;-)
I do not pretent that W3C is less international. Don't try to change the
focus. The point is:
What is really "standard" and what is _really_ behind this word. And when
can we say that "this" ( a spec , a document, etc...) is a "standard".

You said:
> Thats another difference between W3C and ISO - in W3C we are designing
> stuff, not just ratifying it, and we don't have infinite time to do so,
> typically a year or less. We typically have a bunch of divergent
> interests to try and satisfy and we also want it to fit into the
> framework of existing Recommendations and concurrent work in different
> working groups, and we want to get buy-in from implementors and web
> designers.... in less than a year.

can you tell us, apart from what you mentionned earlier. What is currently
presented from W3C to ISO? Is CSS in the process? is HTML in the process (I
heard that yes) can you confirm? Is XML in the process (not as Web SGML but
as XML)?

Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind at netfolder.com

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list