- From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:14:55 +0100
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- Cc: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>
To me the following statement by hixie reads like we have a person in as pivotal position within the working group (editor) who has no faith in the process and is not prepared to constructively engage in working group process. I would suggest this has already had and will continue to have a seriously detrimental effect on HTML5 as a technical specification. is this a situation that the W3C condones and is willing to accept? Hixie wrote [1]: "I find the process this working group is following to be dreadfully unwieldly, opaque, and illogical. I have no intention of attempting to follow this process for issues that are trivial, as I do not consider that a productive use of my time. Furthermore, the low quality of the decisions overall does not motivate one to wish to take part in the process. (For example, decisions are made that literally nobody thinks makes any sense, decisions are made that introduce contradictions in the spec, feedback is ignored, decisions have resulted in outside communities thinking that the the W3C is making the spec "mediocre", etc.) Why bother taking part if the result is just random? (Not all decisions fall into this bucket, but a lot of the ones made over the past two or so months do.)" [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2011Apr/0066.html -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com | www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives - dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Thursday, 14 April 2011 10:15:42 UTC