W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Selectors API naming

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:35:06 -0500
To: "Robert Sayre" <sayrer@gmail.com>
Cc: "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>, "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.tmsbssijwxe0ny@30-5-51.wireless.csail.mit.edu>

On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:24:24 -0500, Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.

Indeed. This was a point raised again and again by various people.

> 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.

Feel free to propose a new W3C process of some kind, but that isn't  
actually the
concern of this working group, which has certain tasks to do under an  
set of conditions. You should take them up with the right part of W3C if  
want to have an effective conversation.



Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com Try Opera 9.1 http://opera.com
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 23:35:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:22 UTC