- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 20:56:45 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- cc: Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012, Glenn Adams wrote: > > ok, but i can't help but hearing an US vs THEM theme here; i certainly > don't have the perception that the WHATWG is operating as a W3C entity > or within W3C process There's definitely an "us" vs "them" here. There's the people doing the work, and the people copying the work. Whether it's a WG copying a CG or the W3C copying the WHATWG or even one editor in a WG copying the work of another editor in the same WG, if it's done without the involvment of the person doing the work, it's both introducing massive confusion to the market (with multiple conflicting drafts that all claim to define the same thing, resulting in lower interop because implementors don't know which to follow), and it's just plain wrong (plagiarism). That anyone would do this on a professional basis, or defend it once it happens, let alone that an entire institution would support this, I find absolutly shocking. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2012 20:57:08 UTC