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

Re: "fighting it out between WGs" (was: inline CSS)

From: Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:32:20 -0800
Message-ID: <38B427B4.AE774ABC@eng.sun.com>
To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
CC: www-html@w3.org
Chris Wilson wrote:
> Murray Altheim [mailto:altheim@eng.sun.com] wrote:
> >Chris Wilson wrote:
> >> "sprinkles" - were discussed in a W3C-sponsored meeting titled "XML 
> >> in HTML" several years ago.  I believe a Note was released of the 
> >>agreements therein.
> >
> >You surely aren't trying to state that the W3C has ever endorsed
> >Microsoft's use of 'XML sprinkles' or 'islands'? I can't find any
> >W3C NOTE on the subject, nor are there any 'agreements' regarding
> >its use that I'm aware of. As such it remains as always a proprietary
> >Microsoft 'feature', not part of any W3C specification.
> Whatever, Murray.  You've exceeded my patience with this conversation.  I
> know that we (meaning Microsoft) attempted to do the right thing with
> sprinkles.  I'm sorry it doesn't fit into your personal view of the world.

I'm sure I've exceeded many people's patience (my own included), but then 
again I've bothered to reply to what, six? people hitting me with the same
thing. Two MS employees and 90% of the CSS WG. You should all just load 
your cannon and fire it once, then I wouldn't have to endlessly repeat myself. 

I'm pretty tired of this conversation as well, and in the end it'll be
'the battle of the network giants' as these two heavyweight contendors
struggle for supremacy in the ring, the former a wrestler out of northern
Europe known for his crushing grip and profuse sweating, the latter an 
ever-changing protoplasmic mass capable of destroying small cities. These
two met once before in a bloody Las Vegas pay-per-view contest that ended in 
stalemate, refereed by none other than Marv Albert during his lingerie days
(though during this match he only wore the lace panties *under* his suit).
> Sun actually HOSTED this meeting, for crying out loud.  The minutes are
> linked from the original agenda:
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/CoordGroup/9802/xml-in-html.html (sorry, this may
> be a members-only link).  My mistake, a Note was never released - merely the
> minutes of the meeting detailing the discussion, and a draft of a
> specification for 'islands'.  Stating this was a proprietary Microsoft
> 'feature' implies we developed this internally with no open standards effort
> at all - and that simply is not the case.  I never said this was a
> Recommendation - I said the syntax was discussed, and some agreements were
> reached, at an open W3C meeting.

Nonsense. You showed your hand to the W3C membership and they didn't buy it. 
As for 'doing the right thing', I was, as I think you know, at that meeting,
and I'm sure we all appreciated hearing proposals from any vendors as to
their plans. You must give me a lot of power if you think *my* world view
was what killed the proposal.

Simply telling the world of your plans in a meeting (I don't recall any 
'agreements' and you don't describe them), failing to write up any 
submission to the W3C when there was little enthusiasm for the proposal,
and then using it anyway in your products, well that's still proprietary
in my book. You're not absolved of the label merely because you told the
W3C about it. As far as I know, Microsoft is the only vendor doing 'XML
islands', and it's not written up in any W3C specification, only mentioned
in the notes from that meeting.


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
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2000 13:32:16 UTC

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