- From: Gerald Bauer <luxorxul@yahoo.ca>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 11:17:39 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-forms@w3.org
Hello, David Baron has written up a blog story titled "The W3C" arguing that the W3C member companies have no interest in a free and open web for all and instead prefer W3C standards that push closed, controlled, environments (where interoperability doesn't matter) and where the W3C member companies can charge money for the client offering. David writes: SVG and XForms weren't even designed for the Web. SVG was designed by graphic designers who wish the fact that Web pages aren't printed on paper would go away and by mobile phone businesses who want vector graphics for sending non-Web content to their mobile phones. Never mind that it ignores one of the key architectural principles of the Web. The main arguments for XForms always seem to relate to "intranet" forms (where companies can earn money), not Web forms (where they can't earn nearly as much, since they can't charge for clients). The W3C community apparently decided years ago that HTML (as distinguished from XHTML) was not the future of the Web. More @ http://dbaron.org/log/2004-06#d20040609 What's your take on it? Do you agree with David Baron that the W3C is now paralysed by commerical interests and that to move on we need a new forum? Or do you think David Baron is a conspiracy nutcase? - Gerald ------------------- Gerald Bauer XUL Alliance | http://xul.sourceforge.net United XAML | http://xaml.sourceforge.net The Thinlet World | http://thinlet.blog-city.com ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2004 11:18:11 UTC