Re: Standards Freshness

Pardon me, but I'm not sure this is a good idea for the following reasons:
1. It generates yet another list that people may need to monitor and manage.
2. It is "context free" in the sense that it doesn't seem to serve any 
purpose other than bibliographic unless...
3. What does "interested parties" mean? We've recently seen some 
shameless and not so shameless (self) promotion and adulation consuming 
band width on this list; no doubt well deserved, but does it take up any 
less bandwidth on its own list?

Maybe before one runs off "getting organized" there might be a little 
open air to create an opportunity for comment and concensus?

Regards.                 ...edN

Molly E. Holzschlag wrote:
> All this book talk--we should start a list of books that people
> like/recommend for standards-related topics.
> 
> Karl, anyone else--would this be something we can coordinate and place
> online on the W3C somewhere, something like "books recommended by interested
> parties" -- wouldn't have to be a W3C recommendation per se, but a resource
> to external sources that the W3C can provide?
> 
> --Molly
> Molly E. Holzschlag
> author + instructor + web designer
> http://www.molly.com/
> .
> 

Received on Friday, 19 July 2002 08:06:31 UTC