The statement IMO appears out-of-place to be structured under a CSF which, as I understand it, is to encourage interoperability. So I can appreciate ATT's view that D-AC001.1.1 is out of scope, or at least out of the scope of interop. If the spirit of the statement is to level the playing field in the sense that being first-to-market and/or having a large market share does not necessarily merit a product or an idea's adoption for standards, then the wording can use some revamping. "Do we really need this," Chris asked? My take is: not really. The boilerplate answer is of course: define "really." ;-) Joe Hui Exodus, a Cable & Wireless service ========================================== > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 5:48 AM > To: wsawg public > Subject: D-AC001.1.1 discussion points > > > ATT: out of the scope > > HP: How are we going to achieve this goal? > > Comment from the Chair: this one is also close. It seems that > in principle, this is a noble CSF, but it is difficult to > measure and possibly impossible to achieve. Question: > do we really need to say this? > >Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2002 17:10:25 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:24:59 GMT