Re: [w3c/charter-html] Charter must state a reason when duplicating work done elsewhere (#139)

> Yes, the W3C has taken a lot of the steps that were necessary when WhatWG was forming — more open, more agile, more pragmatic, and so on — but that was then

No it did not. WHATWG started back in 2004 after almost 3 years of warning on XHTML2 from the whole community including browser vendors (I was there, saw Microsoft complain, did complain myself with Beth Epperson on behalf of Netscape). WHATWG started because W3C did NOT take the steps that were necessary. The very first step W3C took was in 2006, announcing the re-creation of a HTML WG, and it was probably already too late. Then the group was launched. If I skip the first months, the next 3 chairmen were absent OR dictator OR the contrary of pragmatism. Everyone warned about it again, no result, just like when we warned about XHTML2. Then came unconference fashion, community groups and now incubation. So basically, W3C is losing what was its own philosophy while gaining nothing.

No the W3C is not open. Its management is opaque and remains opaque. Individuals still can't join a WG. No the W3C is not agile, and I don't even think it can become agile without being rebuilt. And no the W3C is certainly not pragmatic, pragmatism would make it recognize html is dead at W3C.

> I agree with you for HTML; it’s a flagship spec. that the W3C cannot walk away from.

This is not what I said, I said it's the reason why it happens. To be even clearer, W3C's "strategy" on html is based on a 13 years old decision that the flagship spec must not fall. It HAS fallen, period and hiding the truth behind a plaster (the WG) and words (communication) won't change it.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/charter-html/issues/139#issuecomment-303280427