W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > June 2009

Re: Design Principles, Section 1.6.1 relationship to HTML 4.01

From: Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 13:56:57 -0400
Message-ID: <4A241669.2060600@mozilla.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On 6/1/09 1:23 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Rob Sayre wrote:
>> On 6/1/09 7:01 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> From my point of view, a push to publish a Design Principles 
>>> document as a formal W3C Note is a distraction.  To be clear, I am 
>>> not saying that the Design Principles document itself isn't useful 
>>> and interesting, but the effort to publish it as a Note means that 
>>> the details of the wording is something that must be discussed.
>> There seem to be group members laboring under the assumption that the 
>> Design Principles document does not apply to their suggestions or 
>> objections.
> It is a common debating technique to make grandiose claims without 
> specifics.

That claim is neither grandiose or vague. I could cite instances of this 
behavior, but singling out individuals seems unproductive.

> Now: what was your point?

That arguing against the document is fruitless procedural stalling. 
There are plenty of other working groups where one can work on standards 
that will never appear in a browser.

When the document comes up in argument, there is a possibility that the 
person citing the document as support is "wrapping themselves in the 
flag", but that is relatively easy to spot. If the document has been 
cited correctly, then the group really breaks down: I have seen claims 
that we should restart it from scratch, and claims that it's all a bunch 
of wishy-washy rubbish, but mostly I see claims that the document 
doesn't apply to everyone in the group.

Publishing the document is a useful way to record consensus (...which is 
not unanimity).

- Rob
Received on Monday, 1 June 2009 17:57:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:40 UTC