Re: Call for Editor: URL spec

On 6 November 2012 09:46, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> >
> > Could be slightly more formal?
> > You are speaking of "hypocrisy" but this seems like a matter of
> politeness, right?
>
> I am just saying that the W3C claims to have certain values, but only
> applies those values to other people, not to itself. Specifically, the W3C
> says forking specifications is bad (and even goes out of its way to
> disallow it for its own), but then turns around and does it to other
> people's specifications.
>
> hypocrysy (noun): The practice of claiming to have moral standards or
> beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense.
>
>
> I'm also claiming that when doing so, the W3C does not generally give
> credit where credit is due. For example, this document is basically
> written by Ms2ger:
>
>    http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/innerhtml/raw-file/tip/index.html
>
> Here's the version maintained by Ms2ger, for comparison (the only
> differences I could find were editorial style issues, not even text --
> basically just that the doc has been converted from the anolis style to
> the respec style):
>
>    http://domparsing.spec.whatwg.org/
>
> The most Ms2ger gets is a brief mention in the acknowledgements almost at
> the very end of the document. The WebApps working group gets a whole
> sentence above the fold: "This document was published by the Web
> Applications Working Group". The W3C has their logo right at the top and
> calls the draft a "W3C Editor's Draft".
>
> plagiarism (noun): The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and
> passing them off as one's own.
>

^^ (citation needed) :)


>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
>