W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2012

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

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 20:56:45 +0000 (UTC)
To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
cc: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1212052053390.12469@ps20323.dreamhostps.com>
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Glenn Adams wrote:
> 
> ok, but i can't help but hearing an US vs THEM theme here; i certainly 
> don't have the perception that the WHATWG is operating as a W3C entity 
> or within W3C process

There's definitely an "us" vs "them" here. There's the people doing the 
work, and the people copying the work. Whether it's a WG copying a CG or 
the W3C copying the WHATWG or even one editor in a WG copying the work of 
another editor in the same WG, if it's done without the involvment of the 
person doing the work, it's both introducing massive confusion to the 
market (with multiple conflicting drafts that all claim to define the same 
thing, resulting in lower interop because implementors don't know which to 
follow), and it's just plain wrong (plagiarism). That anyone would do this 
on a professional basis, or defend it once it happens, let alone that an 
entire institution would support this, I find absolutly shocking.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2012 20:57:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 5 December 2012 20:57:09 GMT