- From: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@sci.wfbr.edu>
- Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 16:35:02 -0500 (EST)
- To: papresco@itrc.uwaterloo.ca
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Paul Prescod <papresco@itrc.uwaterloo.ca> wrote: >At 11:30 AM 5/9/96 -0500, Foteos Macrides wrote: >> I'm sure a great many people, and I especially, would appreciate >>a clear exposition of the standardization process, and whether there is >>one at present which could lead effectively and reasonably soon to >>reversals or corrections of what we consider ill advised choices in >>HTML 3.2 -- which could have severely adverse consequences, no matter >>how well intended they might have been. > >Standards bodies are only as authoritative as the communities they serve >decide that they are. IETF is authoritative because it is historical and >because it has a fairly rigorous process for arriving at standards. I'm not >sure what ISOs credentials are, (and http://www.iso.org/ is an >abomination!). But they are well accepted as "authoritative." W3C is a >vendor consortium. I do not see them as authoritiative at all. (though if >enough people _believed_ that they were authorititative they would _be_ >authoritative). > >Right now, they do not have much more standards-setting authority than any >other private body (and less than netscape.com and microsoft.com). Wilbur >weakens their authority in my mind. Thanks Paul, but I am still hoping for a substantive elaboration from Erik Sink on the message he posted. I feel very uncomforatable about blindly entrusting the making of standards for electronic information sharing systems to an organization which repeatedly now has demonstrated difficulty drawing distinctions between information versus propaganda, and seems permanently wedded to the practice of releasing privately generated and ill-discussed drafts in conjunction with press releases aimed at having them perceived as ratified standards. This is exactly the opposite of what many who have worked hard and long on development of the Web were seek to achieve. But the IETF standardization mechanisms also seems to be derailed. So what constructive options are available? And capitulation to scare tacks about creating "fear, uncertainty and doubt" is not one of the options. Uncertainty and doubt are healthy states of mind in such matters. Fote ========================================================================= Foteos Macrides Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU 222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545 =========================================================================
Received on Thursday, 9 May 1996 16:35:05 UTC