W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-plugins@w3.org > September 2003

Timeline?

From: Sturm, Thomas <TSturm@modemmedia.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:08:28 -0700
Message-ID: <216ED4827714D311BF2300508B090E2203C113EF@smtp05.caus.modempoppe.com>
To: public-web-plugins@w3.org
Cc: "'Daniel_Austin@grainger.com'" <Daniel_Austin@grainger.com>, public-web-plugins-request@w3.org

Since the meeting mentioned on the W3C site has been almost a month ago, by
when can we at least expect some sort of timeline from the W3C for a release
of more information? A FAQ wouldn't be bad for starters. 

I'm getting concerned that this is turning into a fly-by-night operation
with a sudden release of a patched IE by Microsoft with no further input
from the development community. It would be nice if we would hear from any
of the participants of those meetings if there was at least some sort of
plan discussed or if Microsoft will now do whatever they want and let us
know when they are done.

Here's a quote from the one page on the W3C site about this situation:

"In addition, the meeting participants strongly supported clear
communication on this matter, including establishing a developer Web site
and mailing list to coordinate approaches for changes to Web sites and
software, and providing early releases of software and documentation."

Judging from this mailing list, I'm not the only one who is still waiting
for "clear communication"...  we shouldn't be sitting here discussing the
questionable merits of software patents, we should be getting a clearer
understanding of what will have to be done to keep our client's web sites
running. 

And it is not just existing sites - I could imagine that a lot of developers
are right now holding off on new projects that involve Flash since we don't
even know if there is any way at all to use these kinds of technologies once
the browser changes come down the pipe.

Thomas

----------------------------------------------------
Thomas Sturm
Senior User Interface Developer

Modem Media
111 Sutter Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
415-733-8429




> ----------
> From: 	Daniel_Austin@grainger.com
> Sent: 	Thursday, September 11, 2003 1:51 PM
> To: 	jakerobb@mac.com
> Cc: 	public-web-plugins@w3.org; public-web-plugins-request@w3.org
> Subject: 	Re: CNN circumvents the Eolas Patent?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Jake,
> 
>      It's all covered by one NDA or another, or I would sell my story to
> the Enquirer for $1M. :)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> D-
> 
> *************************************************
> Dr. Daniel Austin
> Sr. Technical Architect
> daniel_austin@grainger.com
> 847 793 5044
> Visit http://www.grainger.com
> 
> "If I get a little money, I buy books. If there is anything left over, I
> buy clothing and food."
> -Erasmus
> 
> 
>  
> 
>                       Jake Robb
> 
>                       <jakerobb@mac.com>            To:       W3C Public
> Web Plugins List <public-web-plugins@w3.org>                
>                       Sent by:                      cc:
> 
>                       public-web-plugins-req        Subject:  Re: CNN
> circumvents the Eolas Patent?                                  
>                       uest@w3.org
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>                       09/11/2003 03:47 PM
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel,
> 
> Were meeting attendees asked to sign NDA's?  If not, why won't you reveal
> what you learned at the meeting?
> 
> -Jake
> 
> 
> Daniel_Austin@grainger.com wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> >
> >
> >     I have attended many of the meetings about this subject, at W3C and
> > elsewhere. I won't reveal what I learned, but it is safe to say that the
> > article is grossly wrong in some places, and partially wrong in others.
> I
> > would not put too much faith in what is said in the article.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > D-
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2003 21:11:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:56:03 UTC