Re: HTML3.2

Fisher Mark (FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com)
Fri, 10 May 96 15:08:00 PDT


From: Fisher Mark <FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com>
To: "'Foteos Macrides'" <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
Cc: www-html <www-html@www10.w3.org>
Subject: Re: HTML3.2
Date: Fri, 10 May 96 15:08:00 PDT
Message-Id: <3193BD24@MSMAIL.INDY.TCE.COM>


>        I feel very uncomforatable about blindly entrusting the
>making of standards for electronic information sharing systems to
>an organization which repeatedly now has demonstrated difficulty
>drawing distinctions between information versus propaganda, and
>seems permanently wedded to the practice of releasing privately
>generated and ill-discussed drafts in conjunction with press
>releases aimed at having them perceived as ratified standards.
>This is exactly the opposite of what many who have worked hard
>and long on development of the Web were seek to achieve.

Although W3C has made its fair share of public relations blunders, from what 
I understand, the people involved are the same people we have seen on this 
mailing list and the related lists (esp. www-talk) since 1994 (when I joined 
those lists).  W3C has both the expertise of the early Web developers as 
well as the support of most of the major players in commercial Web 
development (Netscape, Microsoft, Softquad, Spry, Terisa, Verity, etc. -- 
see <URL:http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Consortium/Member/List.html> for a 
complete list).  I have not seen any reason to distrust the intentions of 
the W3C, though they need to review their public relations releases (IMHO).

Although I think that eventually there should be a standards-track RFC for 
HTML, I don't see HTML 3.2 as a digression -- it codifies existing practice, 
thereby preparing the way for more substantial enhancements like stylesheets 
and OBJECTs.
======================================================================
Mark Leighton Fisher                   Thomson Consumer Electronics
fisherm@indy.tce.com                   Indianapolis, IN