Re: Nomination for Co-Editor: Dave Hyatt

Hi, Matthew-

Matthew Raymond wrote:
>    The point is that although people like Ian and Dave, through the
> formation of the WHATWG, are largely responsible for pressuring the W3C
> into forming this working group, they are now being excluded from
> positions in the group because their actions were politically
> inconvenient. (In fact, I think the word "inconvenient" was used in the
> Babylon 5 episode I referenced.)

I'm at a loss as to how you regard their being nominated (and most 
likely appointed) as editors as being excluded from positions in this 
group.  No one (not myself, and certainly not the chairs) suggested that 
they *not* be made editors.  Just the opposite, the chairs seem ready to 
appoint Ian as one of the editors.

I'm asking for an *additional* editor with a background and perspective 
outside the WHATWG.  Don't you think that's a reasonable request?

To play devil's advocate... turn the question around and ask why people 
who were not involved in the WHATWG are being excluded from positions in 
this group because they don't follow some of the axioms of the WHATWG 
(such as the rigid stance that HTML 5.0 must include everything from 
previous versions of the language, and that no improvements that are not 
backwards compatible can be made).  Have you considered that perspective?

In point of fact, since no decision has been made, nobody at all has 
been excluded, and I don't think alarmist talk like that improves the 
dialog.  We are all free to air our opinions here, right?  As Maciej 
said, though, it's better if our opinions are backed up by substantive 


Received on Monday, 23 April 2007 05:30:52 UTC