W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2000

Re: HTML vs socio-political correctness

From: Tim Greenhoot <greenhoot_ta@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 16:14:33 GMT
Message-ID: <20000219161433.79406.qmail@hotmail.com>
To: altheim@eng.sun.com, alatus@earthlink.net
Cc: www-html@w3.org
We really should tone down the acrimony and discuss the technology, as best 
we can, on its merits. Please, let us assume proper motives of our 
colleagues unless and until one proves to have ulterior motives on a 
particular point. Even then, let us not cast aside everything that person 
(organization) says because of a prior experience. Each of us is able to 
make mistakes, and we can learn from our own errors as well as from errors 
we see others make. Let's be professional in our conduct as, I think, some 
here have suggested.

>From: Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>
>To: Daniel Hiester <alatus@earthlink.net>
>CC: www-html <www-html@w3.org>
>Subject: Re: HTML vs socio-political correctness
>Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 11:30:42 -0800
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id 
>MHotMailBA77AD2D0038D821979D121D0013C1EC0; Sat Feb 19 01:28:17 2000
>Received: (from daemon@localhost)by www19.w3.org (8.9.0/8.9.0) id 
>EAA12759;Sat, 19 Feb 2000 04:24:19 -0500 (EST)
>From www-html-request@w3.org Sat Feb 19 01:32:38 2000
>Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 04:24:19 -0500 (EST)
>Resent-Message-Id: <200002190924.EAA12759@www19.w3.org>
>Message-ID: <38AD9DE2.563748A2@eng.sun.com>
>Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.13 i586)
>X-Accept-Language: en
>References: <200002190115.RAA12699@checfs1.ucsd.edu> 
>Resent-From: www-html@w3.org
>X-Mailing-List: <www-html@w3.org> archive/latest/2734
>X-Loop: www-html@w3.org
>Sender: www-html-request@w3.org
>Resent-Sender: www-html-request@w3.org
>Precedence: list
>Daniel Hiester wrote:
> >
> > Problem: If necessity is the father of invention, then money is most
> > certainly his mother.
> >
> > I'm going to make harsh generalizations which are not 100% accurate,
> > but are probably mostly true (i.e. over 50%).
>Harsh generalizations are not 100% or 50% or 1% accurate when there is
>no metric for such judgement. They merely represent the opinion of the
>relatively ignorant, ie., those willing to make harsh generalizations.
>Remember the adage that the wise are those who realize the extent of
>their ignorance? Be a bit wiser.
> > In order to make decisions in major technological industries like the
> > Internet, one needs to either form or represent a corporation which has
> > worked hard over the course of several years to EARN LOTS OF MONEY.
> > Furthermore, any such representative of such a corporation must act in 
> > interests of his employer, which is almost invaribly FIND WAYS TO EARN 
> > MONEY. (btw, I'm not trying to imply that I'm yelling things about 
> > I just want to be sure they get noticed).
>[...and on and on...]
>Happening to be an employee of a large corporation that has over the
>course of its years earned plenty of money, I find little here but
>weak conjecture, based on my experience among some very intelligent
>and thoughtful individuals who care quite deeply about the quality of
>the standards and specifications we produce. Certainly there are those
>who jockey for profit motives, but I don't believe they are in the
>majority, and their efforts are usually pretty transparent. And even
>though some of us are rather ivory-principled, we're also not entirely
>devoid of pragmatism, either. Heavens, some of us have even worked in
>small businesses and government, where pragmatism reigns!
>Perhaps by virtue of working in larger, successful corporations we
>have the luxury of not worrying that our day-to-day efforts contribute
>so directly to the company's bottom line; that among us are those who
>are very concerned with doing good service to the community; that in
>the end this provides service to both that community and those
>companies that benefit from interoperable, high quality standards.
>There is no particular moral high ground gained by working in
>government, in smaller businesses, or as a private consultant, and
>no reason to believe that we in larger corporations have so little
>moral fiber as to be motivated primarily by financial reward. Speaking
>for myself, money has almost nothing to do with it.
>I might take umbrage with your statements (which are even couched in
>apology), but I'm guessing you simply don't know any better. There
>is no conspiracy, probably just a bunch of folks who like to get
>together and argue a lot. A lot.
>Murray Altheim                            <mailto:altheim?x40;eng.sun.com>
>XML Technology Center
>Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025
>    the honey bee is sad and cross and wicked as a weasel
>    and when she perches on you boss she leaves a little measle -- archy

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Saturday, 19 February 2000 11:15:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:53 UTC