W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > March to April 2002

RE: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Methods (whenToUseGet-7)

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: 25 Apr 2002 18:57:04 -0400
To: Anne Thomas Manes <atm@systinet.com>
Cc: "Www-Talk@W3. Org" <www-talk@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1019775424.824.88.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 18:31, Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
> If W3C doesn't want to be a part of this effort, then let's just be up front
> about out. Let's cancel the entire Web Services Activity, and we (the
> members) will just take our work elsewhere. (Be prepared to lose a few of
> us.) Personally, I'd rather have the standardization effort happen at a
> venue that isn't trying to undermine the effort.

There is another way to look at the the current discussion.

We could contemplate the possibility that W3C is in fact attempting to
help Web Services by, in some sense, saving the project from its worst
enemy: its own impatience and insistence that the current way is the
only proper way.  I've not heard much technical argument that current
Web Services approaches are a good idea - even your message acknowledged
"abusing POST" - so I have no problem believing that possibility.

That doesn't seem to go over very well with people who want their Web
Services and want them yesterday. I'm not a W3C participant (in large
part because I feel the formulation as vendor consortium is an ugly
mistake all its own), but I know I value the Web a lot more than I value
Web Services in their current form, so I guess we're stuck.

Personally, I'd rather have a standardization effort that doesn't try to
undermine the venue.
 
-- 
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
Received on Thursday, 25 April 2002 18:52:04 GMT

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