W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: Re: CfC: publish WD of XHR; deadline November 29

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 09:09:53 -0800
Message-ID: <CAJE5ia8MZwPnT1dLhWieSaRZBaCq=3DxHeb3LQHbpx48GJCNgA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen <hallvord@opera.com>
Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Hallvord Reiar Michaelsen Steen
<hallvord@opera.com> wrote:
>>> Are you claiming that the W3C is in the business of plagiarizing?
>> I'm saying that the W3C (and this working group in particular) is
>> taking Anne's work, without his permission, and passing it off as its
>> own.
> Speaking as one of the W3C-editors of the spec: first I agree that crediting needs to be sorted out, and that Anne should be credited in a way that better reflects his contributions. I appreciate that Ms2ger points this out during the RfC.
> Secondly, I think it's a bit harsh to say that we take his work "without his permission" - legally I believe the WHATWG deliberately publishes under a licence that allows this, and on a moral and practical basis as W3C-editors intend to collaborate with Anne in the best possible way under a situation that's not really by our design, we involve him in discussions, appreciate his input, I've also sent pull requests on GitHub to keep the specs in sync and intend to continue to do so. I hope that claiming that we act without Anne's permission depicts a working environment that's less constructive than what we're both aiming for and achieving.

I'm happy that you and Anne have a productive working relationship.
My comment is based on this message:


Perhaps I should have moved the phrase "without his permission" to the
end of the sentence.

Received on Friday, 23 November 2012 17:10:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:50 UTC