Atom at W3C? - 2004 NY discussion minutes

Chaals,

Le 24 juin 2010 à 19:26, Charles McCathieNevile a écrit :
> Talking about what has successfully gone through W3C and what has been bogged down, and why, might be helpful. If it is a clear and frank explanation.

This is one example: the discussions [1] around Atom. 
We approached the Atom people and discussed if there 
was an opportunity to make this happen at W3C. I was 
around the table.

If I remember correctly, there were 2 big fears:

* Semantic Web gurus influencing the work
* too slow compared to IETF

Sam Ruby wanted the thing out the 1st quarter of 2005.
	"I'd like to go for PR at 1st qtr of next year."

During the discussions, David Orchard said something 
interesting

	do: Advantage is the community of people. W3C is 
	a mixture of vendor-driven and team-driven. It 
	doesn't have as much of a grassroots. There's a 
	perception that it would be difficult to get 
	grassroots into W3C."

Then W3C drafted a charter [2] to give a more concrete 
proposal to the Atom community. There was a discussion 
about this, on the atom list [3]. An explanation of Matt 
May on Atom-W3C discussions [4]. One on XML.com [6]. 
And from Tim Bray [7]. And from Isolani. [8]

Atom went to IETF, and became the RFC 4287 [5] in 
December 2005, a bit later that what Sam wanted but not 
that far off. I have the feeling it would have taken a 
bit more time at W3C. 


[1]: http://www.w3.org/2004/05/18-atom-nyc
[2]: http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/W3cCharter
[3]: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=+site:www.imc.org+%22Atom++WG+W3C+Charter+Mockup%22
[4]: http://www.bestkungfu.com/archive/date/2004/06/atomw3c-redux/
[5]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
[6]: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/05/19/deviant.html
[7]: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/06/02/AtomMeetingReport
[8]: http://www.isolani.co.uk/blog/atom.html

-- 
Karl Dubost
Montréal, QC, Canada
http://www.la-grange.net/karl/

Received on Saturday, 3 July 2010 05:09:36 UTC