W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > April 1998

W3 membership was Re: Open Standards Processes

From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 14:56:44 -0400 (EDT)
To: "XSL STYLE LIST" <xsl-list@mulberrytech.com>, "css sheets" <www-html-request@w3.org>, <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>, "Matthew Gertner" <matthew@praxis.cz>, "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <01bd6fcc$03ce38a0$31afdccf@uspppBckman>
    I am today setting up a not-for-profit legal entity in Ohio, which will
be called (name to be decided pending a name search) .The books will be
audited by Berwick Perlman and Mills a highly respected Cleveland legal
firm. (Now there's an oxymoron).

    Membership will be limited to those who have a bone-fide interest in
writing about Internet related topics.

    If there is enough interest we will apply for membership to the W3
organization as an affiliate.


    Affiliate membership is $5000/yr., and 3 yr. up front is required, so do
the sums!!

    About 20 interested people would make it worth while, and cost up front
about $800. (unfortunately there are costs to setting up the legal entity,
which I have paid myself, but I would like to be refunded!!)

        Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Boumphrey <bckman@ix.netcom.com>
To: Matthew Gertner <matthew@praxis.cz>; xml-dev@ic.ac.uk <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
Date: Friday, April 24, 1998 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: Open Standards Processes


>>Anyone interested in setting up a corporation whose only purpose is to
join
>>the W3C and "hire" interested individuals for a reasonable fee? (evil :-).
>
>
>Now there's a thought. Anyone interested?(I'm serious)!!
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matthew Gertner <matthew@praxis.cz>
>To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
>Date: Friday, April 24, 1998 8:43 AM
>Subject: Re: Open Standards Processes
>
>
>>Simon,
>>
>>Your argument is convincing, but doesn't explain why open access is not
>>given to works-in-progress for consultation by interested parties (i.e.
>>read-only access). I appreciate the need of the W3C to avoid involving too
>>many chefs in cooking up its standards, for exactly the reasons you
>mention.
>>I also appreciate the need of the organization to finance its activities.
>>However, the pricing scheme is pretty unfair. A company with $49 million
in
>>revenue can join as an affiliate member for about 0.01% of revenues (and
>the
>>fee for full membership is pretty insignificant for the Microsofts and
IBMs
>>of the world), whereas for, say, a small Web startup in Prague the
>affiliate
>>membership fee represents a few month's salary for the average programmer
>>(life is cheap out here...).
>>
>>Anyone interested in setting up a corporation whose only purpose is to
join
>>the W3C and "hire" interested individuals for a reasonable fee? (evil :-).
>>
>>Matthew
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Simon St.Laurent <SimonStL@classic.msn.com>
>>To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
>>Date: Friday, April 24, 1998 3:26 PM
>>Subject: RE: Open Standards Processes (WAS Re: Nesting XML based languages
>>and scripting languages)
>>
>>
>>>Len Bullard suggested:
>>>
>>>>o  All drafts posted to the web at all times.  Anyone can
>>>>   read and anyone can contribute.  Only a few people edit
>>>>   and ISO makes the rules for these people, not the consortia.
>>>>   Ensures openness and "a level playing field".
>>>
>>>Frank Boumphrey added:
>>>
>>>>What about us poor authors!! We have to write "knowledgeably" about a
>>>>subject that doesn't even exist. Our books usually appear at about the
>>same
>>>>time as a spec which invalidates every thing we have written!!
>>>
>>>While I sympathize with everyone's impatience, and have lived Frank's
>'poor
>>>authors' issue repeatedly, I would hesitate to change the XML process
>>>dramatically at this point.  The discussions on this list in the past few
>>days
>>>about 'semantics' alone have shown once again the kinds of rocks on which
>>this
>>>kind of project may founder if it opens up too widely.  XML-Dev would
>>probably
>>>be a much louder list than it is if people felt their comments would have
>a
>>>direct impact on the standard, instead of the informal listening that (I
>>>think) does go on here.  I'm not sure all of that loud would be useful or
>>>productive.
>>
>>
>>
>>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
>>Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
>>To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
>>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>>To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following
>message;
>>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
>>
>>
>
>
>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
>Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
>To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following
message;
>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
>
>
Received on Monday, 27 April 1998 04:48:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:36 GMT