Re: First Draft of W3C version of URL Spec

On September 3, 2014 at 12:20:51 PM, David Singer ( wrote:
> > Even if it’s true that single objections rarely carry the day,  
> if everyone behaved this way, we could have the absurd situation  
> in which most people objected to something but no-one bothered  
> to say so. These checks presume that if we care, we say so, and then  
> everyone knows where we stand. Even if we proceed, it’s useful  
> to know the level, nature, and origin of concerns, and have them  
> on record.

That's fair. We will be sure to object to any publication of copy/pasted specs going forward (and eventually seek to have them removed from W3C charters). 

The W3C now have a pretty extensive record of people's concerns. 

> You do realize that you (pl.) are spending a heck of a lot more time  
> on this after the fact than a simple objection to the charter would  
> have taken, and your position now would also be a whole load more  
> credible had you objected?

We were acting in good faith in that the people copy/pasting the specs would be able to handle this task. To date, they haven't so we are trying to put a stop to it (as it's demonstratively doing more harm than good). 

Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 16:32:02 UTC