- From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:14:30 +0100
- To: michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com
- Cc: ifette@google.com, johnath@mozilla.com, public-wsc-wg@w3.org
On 2007-11-19 17:22:57 -0600, michael.mccormick@wellsfargo.com wrote: > I agree any WSC recommendation which faces resistance from the UA > community needs serious discussion. And that, in particular, means discussion with those who resist it. As a reminder, one of the core points here is coming to some broader consensus about what we do, as a community. If parties disagree, we try to listen and discuss. If people say "it's not deployable", we try to understand why, and try to come to a useful compromise. For my taste, the current discussion is going way too far into a "WSC WG vs the browser vendors" mode. That's wrong: The value of this effort is to have as many of the affected parties as possible -- browser vendors, users, academics, ... -- at one table, and to come up with a useful consensus between these parties. I'd also like to remind everybody that we will have a Candidate Recommendation at some point. In that phase, we'll have to show actual implementation experience. That is not a criterion that we can satisfy through mere handwaving that something might be feasible. -- Thomas Roessler, W3C <tlr@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 22:54:42 UTC