W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2007

RE: face to face meeting host offers for the HTML WG?

From: Niko Neugebauer <niko@nikoport.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:28:31 -0000 (WET)
Message-ID: <1541.>
To: "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
Cc: work@gavinpearce.co.uk, public-html@w3.org


for what it’s worth you have my full support.

To my knowledge, there is no information Chris, of misusing the trust of
others. This is a very big group, and a lot of opinions are represented,
but is there anyone who really believes that there is a small chance of
doing this without Microsoft, and then having the new specification
implemented in one of the next IEs ? If we cant work out the personal
issues, there will be no new specification, not in 3 months, and not even
in 3 years.

Lets stop all the personal issues and get to work.

Niko Neugebauer

> Gavin,
> 	That would be my point exactly.  Follow the thread on my blog
> and Daniel's (my first post is at
> http://blogs.msdn.com/cwilso/archive/2007/01/10/you-me-and-the-w3c-aka-r
> einventing-html.aspx) and perhaps you'll see what I'm referring to.
> I want to evolve HTML.  I thought at one point, apparently naively, that
> since I could see both sides of the issue - the value of both the WHATWG
> goals and the W3C IP policy and process - that perhaps I could help here
> and make this a better world.  I can't do that and fight personal
> battles at the same time.  I feel I've been doing that, being accused of
> making some kind of secret back-room deals or something that I simply
> haven't been doing.  Perhaps this just caught me at a bad time; Daniel's
> mail to me seemed to imply that a sizable portion of the group does not
> want me to be co-chair.  If you collectively don't think it's a good
> idea to have me as co-chair, then I'd prefer not to waste my time, and
> I'm sure Dan will do a fine job.  I'm asking for a vote of confidence
> (or not) from the rest of the group.  My feelings are not going to be
> hurt either way.
> Regardless of my co-chairship, someone from Microsoft will participate
> in this WG.  I've said that before, it continues to be true.  Even if I
> am co-chair, I've said I think it might be a good idea to have a
> different Microsoft WG representative.  I'm sorry we have not been agile
> in getting approval for that participation; I take full personal
> responsibility for that.  It has been an accident of very poor timing, a
> somewhat lengthy process that we must follow internal to Microsoft for
> due diligence, and my own time management that has caused this delay,
> not necessarily in that order.  It is not due to a lack of interest or
> desire.
> -Chris
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 19:29:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:21:34 UTC