Message-Id: <199605081728.KAA20609@web1.calweb.com> Subject: Futility of public forum To: email@example.com Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 10:28:28 -0700 (PDT) From: "Lee Daniel Crocker" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Regardless of the merits of this 3.2 draft, it concerns me that the standardizing process is ignoring this public forum. The fact that Cnet published a news item on 3.2 gives it a weight and legitimacy that will cause many people to start coding to it and calling it a "standard", and it had no review by this forum at all. Are those of us on this list who couldn't fork up the 15,000 because we represent the non-commercial aspects of the net just engaged in a masturbation exercise here, or does the W3 actually want to hear us? Perhaps if it were posted to this list before it was posted to the world, we could have made minor suggestions like clarifying the language of <div> or restoring "class" that perhaps were just overlooked. Otherwise what is this list for? It _is_ possible to create a complete, technically superior, painstakingly precise, useful standard in a short time with public comment. Look at PNG: we did it in 4 months, without a six-figure budget, with public comment. It met all of our goals, is state-of-the-art, and is already supported by more vendors than HTML 3.X. I am not yet ready to join the defectors on this one--I think HTML can be saved and I don't think we can drum up enough support for an alternative yet (PNG started with support from CompuServe and a mob of folks angry with Unisys; I don't think we have that advantage here).