confidentiality in W3C WGs

[Ronald Bourret]

Reynolds, Gregg wrote:

> Here is the best you will ever get without an open process:  the reason
> proposition X passed is that it got the most votes.  I'm not making a 
joke:
> that IS the reason XHTML got three name spaces, and its the only reason.
> Why doesn't matter.

Why does often matter. Here's two reasons:

* Why helps explain what. As a simple example of this, consider the design 
goals at the start of each W3C spec.  These certainly aren't required by 
the rules written in the spec, which are undoubtedly clear, concise, and 
unambiguous ;), but they go a long way towards setting up the context in 
which the reader understands the spec.

* Why helps adoption. If there's a hard technical trade-off to be made in a 
spec, the result is not going to make everybody happy. Explaining why helps 
people understand why the decision was made as it was and gives them a 
stake in that position. Telling them what only leaves them confused, 
annoyed, and ready to jump ship for something better. Dictatorships and 
democracies both work, but democracies get a lot more genuine support.

Why doesn't have to be directly in the spec, but it needs to be somewhere 
more than in just a few people's heads.

-- Ron Bourret


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)