Knowledge base

>
>>If something is correct, let's make sure we know what it is.

> I think a knowledge base system would be a great idea for this.
> Something that can be updated and modified as we learn what works and
> what doesnt.  Waiting for the next standard to go through the approval
> procees in order to distribute this information causes a great delay and
> many correct ideas may be forgotten by then.  The standards should
> gather information from these knowledge bases when it comes time to
> update the standards.  These knowledge bases should have many ideas on
> how to solve many types of problems encountered.  A possible solution
> should be included no matter how politically wrong it is.  Given that it
> may be politcally wrong, it may not be perfect, but it plants a seed for
> someone to improve upon.  Often with these lists, an initial idea comes
> to light to address an issue.  This idea is "not quite right"
> politically, it gets improved upon and built upon.  In the process of
> improving the original idea, the original problem gets lost and the
> "Correct" way of doing something solves a totally different problem than
> what the original problem was.
>

I would be happy to host the knowledge base if the W3C has a problem with
suggesting politically incorrect solutions and/or constant changing of
documents without an approval routine.  I think the W3C's document
approval system is great, but this eliminates unwanted but valid solutions
to problems as stated above.  I am not trying to change the way W3C does
reccomendations.  I believe that the techniques of WAI are a good start,
but again, not very broad and only "approved" solutions are in there.

-Steve

Received on Tuesday, 30 March 2004 17:35:21 UTC