W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > March to April 1997

RE: IE4.0 and W3C Standards -Reply

From: Thomas Reardon <thomasre@MICROSOFT.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 09:20:26 -0800
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-76-MSG-970305172026Z-201112@INET-03-IMC.itg.microsoft.com>
To: "'Erik Aronesty'" <erik@shell.inch.com>, Scott Isaacs <scotti@MICROSOFT.com>, "'www-style@w3.org'" <www-style@w3.org>, "'www-talk@w3.org'" <www-talk@w3.org>
Thanks for playing Erik.  Next?

I am gonna step in here and add one thing quickly: if some folks out
there have pent up hostilities towards Microsoft, for whatever
ill-educated reasons, pls continue to fire away.  Then you can add up
all the email aliases and move them to a new "www-i-hate-msft" alias and
leave the rest of us to address the real technology issues of the Web.

As for the substance of Scott's post, that the CRN article is completely
WRONG, well you can imagine that for those of us who've been busting
butt and sweating the hard work of standards, the article hurt.  I've
personally spent an enormous amount of time on HTML and related issues,
Scott has spent his whole life for the last year on it.  Its hard in
this environment to get any credit at all, typically thats fine, but I
refuse to let one terribly false article destroy the hard-won progress
we've made so far in opening up HTML and creating a real standard.

I stand by our track record on Web standards.  We are a leading
implementor of open Web protocols&standards: HTTP, PPP, HTML, CSS,
COM/DCOM, etc.  These are huge investments and ones we take very
seriously.

-Thomas Reardon
Microsoft

ps: MSVC bashing?  ouch, that really hurt.

>
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 1997 12:18:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:22 GMT