W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > February 2001

RE: WWW: Interoperability Crisis?

From: Wilbur Streett <WStreett@mail.Monmouth.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2001 05:29:35 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20010204052935.01e4c290@mail.monmouth.com>
To: "Charles F. Munat" <chas@munat.com>, "'Wilbur Streett'" <WStreett@mail.Monmouth.com>
Cc: <www-talk@w3.org>, <www-html@w3.org>
At 01:06 PM 2/3/01 -0800, Charles F. Munat wrote:
>I wrote:
>>> Again, I recommend the WAI IG list for advice.
>
>Wilbur Streett replied:
>> You can't even write out the name of the group.
>
>My reply:
>My apologies. I presumed that since you are an expert on the needs of the
>blind, 

I'm sorry that you are unable to find any supporting statements from me to
support your assertions.

>you would already be familiar with the WAI. The WAI is the Web
>Accessibility Initiative, a project of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
>The WAI IG is the WAI's Interest Group. It is described on the W3C site
>thus:
>
>"Activity in terms of meeting agenda, presentations being made, results, but
>also exchange ideas, and give input to the working group."
>
>You can access the Web Accessibility Initiative's web page here:
>
>http://www.w3.org/WAI/
>
>You can also subscribe to the Interest Group's mailing list. Directions can
>be found here:
>
>http://www.w3.org/Mail/

So you finally managed to go back and supply the full terminology for your
use of acronyms.  You claim that everyone must meet your requirements or be
denied access to the Internet, but you yourself are lacking in meeting the
generic requirements of English as taught in numerous classes throughout
your education.  

>Essentially, you subscribe by sending an email to w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
>with the word subscribe in the Subject header.

Oh, and that is on topic how?

>As for the rest of your rebuttal, as far as I can see you are simply
>reiterating what you said in earlier posts, albeit with considerably more
>sarcasm and bile. 

In other words, you are incapable of responding to the truth.

>Since I already stated my views clearly in a previous
>post, I see no reason to waste time in pointless (and off-topic) discussion,
>though there may be others on this list who wish to take issue with some of
>your comments.

Or take issue with your comments.  You claim that no one that produces a
page that doesn't meet your standards should be allowed to post that page
to the Internet.  I think that a large number of people have issue with
that sort of idea.  If they don't then they should.

Wilbur


     --------------------------------------------
        Putting A Human Face On Technology ;-)
     --------------------------------------------
        Literally!  http://www.TheFaceOf.com
Received on Saturday, 3 February 2001 17:28:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:45 GMT