W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2002

the Web, again (RE: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Methods (whenToUseGet-7))

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: 23 Apr 2002 20:18:29 -0400
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1019607510.2891.229.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Tue, 2002-04-23 at 19:14, David Orchard wrote:
> For the W3C to NOT do Web Services, it would mean that many members of the
> W3C - as at least represented at the web services workshop and the 64 paper
> submissions - would be ignored.  And that W3C Process would be ignored.  We
> have already had this debate, and the W3C Team and Membership have created
> the Web Services Activity, Descriptions, and Architecture Groups.  And the
> W3C will create more Web Services Working Groups.  The W3C has a
> well-defined process, and it was followed.

It seems that the question I asked earlier about the boundaries of Web
was not such a bad one.  David appears here to suggest that the Web is
whatever the membership wants, subject to W3C process. 

I fear that recent exchanges are illustrating quite clearly how the will
of the members, especially "big business", appears to inflict
substantial costs on the Web by complicating its architecture immensely
and perhaps irrevocably.

I strongly suggest that the TAG (and perhaps the W3C) consider seriously
the question of whether the Web is something whose outlines they are
describing or simply a project that can go any direction its members
find interesting or profitable.

There's a lot of technical substance in that probably political

For specific TAG action, I suspect the Introduction to the Architecture
document is once again worth a close read, and perhaps some extension to
suggest which practices are inside or outside of the Web.

Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2002 20:28:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:31 UTC