- From: cobaco <cobaco@freemen.be>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 00:39:05 +0200
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
On Saturday, Sat, 2013/07/06, John Foliot wrote: > What *you* might lose is the idea that somehow the W3C is obligated to > serve your needs as a citizen and user of the internet. Why you believe > you have this right today I do not know, perhaps because the W3C has > been as open and accommodating to the public and public feedback as they > have been all these years. wow, just wow, re-read what jou've written here > What this means for *your* definition of the "Open Web" of course will > also remain to be seen. Clearly you will be disappointed, frustrated, > disenfranchised, etc., etc. you're really showing your true colors here if not the interest of web citizens and web users who should the W3C serve? Corporate interests that want to divide the web between themselves, each with their own fiefdom where they have total control? On the web corporations get no more control then individuals, everyone is equally able to add content, and equally unable to restrict distribution. That's the one characteristic that makes the web superior to every communication technology that came before. It's the complete and utter democratization of communiation technology. I get that's a loss of control and power that the traditional media-monguls bemoan loudly. I get that's a level of control and power that the up and coming media giants like Apple and Google very much desire. I get that both those groups are trying their best to reestablish that control and power. But that view is fundamentally incompatible with the view of the Web as the democratization of communication, which is the essence of the open web. As such W3C should explicitly reject it. @jeff: does W3C support Johns views? -- Cheers, Cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
Received on Monday, 8 July 2013 22:39:53 UTC