- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 09:32:57 -0800
- To: "Phill Jenkins" <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, w3c-wai-eo@w3.org
At 10:59 AM 1/28/2002 -0500, Phill Jenkins wrote: >Are you saying that people shouldn't get to put stuff on the internet if >they don't have the freedom to protect it? I hope that's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that the recent effort to make the process of setting standards be beholden to patent/copyright considerations is a huge step backward. I am saying that many participating members continue to ignore the standards, in particular those dealing with accessibility. I am saying that the effort to "own" the internet/Web/network should be strongly fought by W3C rather than the consortium being a creature of the members. The feeling that they are "allowed" in the consortium, rather than that it's "theirs" is what I'm addressing. PJ:: "...PF & EO? These groups are as about as opposite as it gets..." The PF/EO thing might seem at first blush to be "disparity in action" but the maintenance of rigorous standards and the dissemination of the idea behind all this are inseparable. In PF we have created a basis for almost all the W3C's "standards" with our XAG. The conformance thereto is spotty at best and should be mandatory for membership. The EO effort is how all this gets fed to the ultimate participants: everybody. They've even passed laws based on this work but we're still faced with members who live outside the law. Pandering to "old tired ethics" of "idea ownership" in an era when that concept is bankrupt is dangerous to our mission. The "alarmist" nature of the subject line is based (I think soundly) on vast past experience wherein a great idea becomes corrupted by an absence of vigilance on the part of those closest to the idea. Not to point fingers, but the creators of both XMetaL (SoftQuad) and XMLSpy (Altova) have made zero effort to participate in the extremely important matter of making their tools both accessible to PWD and to produce XAG-compliant materials. We have done little/nothing to make such ignorance of our principles unacceptable. A year from now when there is a huge struggle to retrofit those efforts we can look back at this time when something was possible and again rue the loss of Yuri Rubinsky. -- Love. It's Bad Luck to be Superstitious!
Received on Monday, 28 January 2002 12:34:25 UTC