Rebuttal: IE4.0 and W3C Standards

At 09:20 PM 06-03-97 -0800, Huge Cajones Remailer wrote:
>Thomas Reardon wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for playing Erik.  Next?
>
>Is this some sort of Micro$oft "tough-boy" talk?
>
[...]
>
>You and your company should go back and crawl in a cave in Redmond, and
>let those of us with integrity and ability do the real work.
>
Wow! That's pretty tough talk coming from someone who 
claims to have big balls, but doesn't have enough to
identify himself as other than a "nobody".

I have been working on the development of HTML specs
since 1994, and it is my opinion that the process
for developing new features in HTML has never been 
better than has been in the past few months.

Submissions are frequently rejected by the HTML WG
and the CSS WG, or are turned back for further work.
Members of these working groups are being scrupulous
about following the W3C process.

No matter what your opinion of Microsoft, Netscape,
or any of the other members of these working groups,
it is inappropriate to slam the process or result
based on personally held feelings.

As the spokesperson for SoftQuad on matters pertaining
to our relationship with W3C in general and these working
groups in particular, I resent the implication that the
members serve only to "rubber stamp" proposals emanating
from MS and NS. SoftQuad has been a proponent of good
design and clear specifications since the inception of
the original IETF HTML WG, and later under the auspices
of the W3C.

Regards,

Murray


Murray Maloney	
Technical Director  
SoftQuad Inc.

Received on Monday, 10 March 1997 14:51:27 UTC