- From: Duncan Bayne <dhgbayne@fastmail.fm>
- Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 20:21:52 -0800
- To: public-restrictedmedia@w3.org
> Le 19 nov. 2013 à 12:57, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> a écrit : > I wasn't there at the time, so maybe you are right that W3C reversed itself. It's not the fact that it reversed itself that I'm trying to highlight. I don't think the reversal itself was a bad thing, in fact, quite the contrary (to quote Paul Samuelson, "Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?"). What I'm trying to highlight is that: - the W3C started down a path that would be disastrous for the Open Web - this happened at the behest of a small subset of Web users - i.e., the influence of certain members was out of all proportion to their number (the old 'crisis of representation' again) - when put to the public for consultation, there was a "firestorm of criticism" - the W3C took that on board, and reversed itself, for the good of the Open Web This is the *exact same pattern* we see today, only it's DRM not Patents. You've done an about-face in the interests of the Open Web in the past. The Open Web now holds the whip hand, as compared to 2002, but people here are speaking as though it'll "lose" if you about-face again. That wasn't correct in 2002, and it certainly isn't true in 2013. -- Duncan Bayne ph: +61 420817082 | web: http://duncan-bayne.github.com/ | skype: duncan_bayne I usually check my mail every 24 - 48 hours. If there's something urgent going on, please send me an SMS or call me.
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 04:22:15 UTC