- From: Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:24:24 -0500
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <chaals@opera.com>
- Cc: "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>, "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On 1/26/07, Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com> wrote: > > Since I have the reponsibility for getting this group to finish its work > in a > particular timeframe, I made a decision to find some kind of resolution in > line > with the process under which we are working. Which happens to offer the > opportunity to discuss with Microsoft in advance, and with various other > implementors, and see if they are prepared to agree to something. I'm not trying to hold you up. Keep the terrible name. In the end, it is easy to route around. The point on the process stands, though, and shows a awful flaw that future W3C WGs need to avoid. Perhaps this WG should be rechartered as well. The W3C process should produce standards that use idiomatic HTML, JavaScript, and CSS. That never happens. Instead, we get the typical W3C product: a result of compromise between IDE vendors, Java/C# programmers, and Semantic Web advocates. -- Robert Sayre "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 23:24:29 UTC