W3C's 'Moral Majesty'

[Len Bullard]

Ann Navarro wrote:
> 
> And finally, I must agree with Tim wrt: the value of face to face meetings.
> In fact, if we *weren't* so global in nature, I'd argue for *more* face to
> face meetings, rather than fewer, as productivity is so greatly increased
> during those periods.

Then, Ann, there is no difference between the processes which the W3C
uses 
to create specifications and ISO uses to create standards.  The four
F2Fs 
a year typical in ISO work exactly the same.  The difference is ISO
produces 
documented issues and change lists.  It uses professional and proven
means 
to edit standards.  Where are the issues and reasons for the changes to
the 
XHTML specification being asked for by members of the development
community?  
Produce these and answer their questions or drop the pretense of moral 
majesty.

In effect, the W3C is a consortium trying to write standards and has no
moral majesty, 
just a single authority vested to make decisions.  This is neither moral 
nor more effective:  just speedy.   Given the results for XHTML and the
wide 
umbrage, that speed may be perceived as bought at the cost of quality. 
So, the 
criticism of ISO and IETF in the article is obsequious and underhanded. 
Don't 
expect the press to report the right facts as long as the W3C feeds them 
self-serving propaganda.

len


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)