Alternatives to the W3C

David Brownell david-b at
Thu Jan 20 20:29:50 GMT 2000

Ann Navarro wrote:
> At 10:06 PM 1/19/00 -0600, Len Bullard wrote:
> >Ann Navarro wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> There's nothing in IE 5 functionality that is so compelling to *content*
> >> that it should be "required" to use.
> >
> >> Your conclusions are highly debatable.
> >
> >But the barriers aren't artificial.
> Sure they are. The minute you say "you must use <arbitrary browser/software
> here>" for an application being served over a medium that was designed to
> be machine/platform/software independent, you've created an artificial
> barrier.


The web is about open and, dare I say it, _commodity_ standards.

That's how it grew so quickly.  De-commoditizing would be a great
short-term fix for some companies' market power, but bad long-term
from the user perspectve due to a decreased ability for innovation
to occur.

- Dave

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as: or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Unsubscribe by posting to majordom at the message
unsubscribe xml-dev  (or)
unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email at your-subscribed-address

Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list