- From: Steven Rowat <steven_rowat@sunshine.net>
- Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 11:02:54 -0700
- To: public-html@w3.org
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On Sep 20, 2009, at 3:35 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> I'll use your vague link to what Steven said to say the following: >> >> If "people who produce their own content that they wish to have >> distributed (or sold) via web pages" is out of scope for HTML5, then >> you are confirming what Steven said. > > The process of producing content is in scope. The business and economics > of selling content is not. This is exactly the same as for HTML4. So > this can't be an argument that HTML5 is worse for a particular audience > than HTML4. No, I disagree with your last line: I make an argument on exactly that basis: it's actually *because* HTML5 continues to fail, as HTML4 did, at the direct sale of content, that the only way remaining to monetize the web is by value-adding around the (free) content with Web Services and advertising. This pushes the monetization of the web towards the professional coders who will use the new tools and efficiencies in HTML5 to continue to build advertising, professional publishing (middlemen), and web services. I am not against any of these things per se. But I believe if the internet builds only them, without rewarding what individuals contribute directly through full-time, committed, life-long work at creating the best content, there will be major losses to society from spending more time in the current forms of HTML4/5. The issue of how to sell content produced by individuals remains unsolved in HTML5, as you have stated. What I am attempting to say is that this is not a minor issue and it is unsolved for over two decades now. Meanwhile monetization of the web will proceed; is proceeding; but not for individuals; only for those with deep pockets.
Received on Sunday, 20 September 2009 18:04:14 UTC