- From: Jonathan Rosenne <rosenne@qsm.co.il>
- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 08:25:51 +0200
- To: "James P. Salsman" <bovik@best.com>
- Cc: ietf@ietf.org, www-forms@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
In my experience, the proper way to develop standards is to begin with a private implementation. Only with practical experience can sufficient understanding be achieved to enable the writing of a good standard. Nearly all prevalent standards have followed this course, including HTML. An example of writing the standard first is OSI. Jony > -----Original Message----- > From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 11:47 PM > To: James P. Salsman > Cc: ietf@ietf.org; www-forms@w3.org; www-html@w3.org > Subject: Re: HTML forms > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2000 13:03:07 PST, "James P. Salsman" said: > > is assured on almost all controversial matters. The W3C, > > however, constrains meaningful debate to those willing and able > > to pay US$50,000 per year. I agree that there was a point in > > the early development of web standards when that constraint was > > beneficial. Now, however, with Netscape owned by a company > > Why was it beneficial then? > > > shipping MSIE, and the stagnation or regression of the core HTML > > standards, along with the concerns raised in Norman Solomon's > > article, I believe the time has come to return certain aspects > > And why is it non-beneficial now, given the apparent complexity of > getting a product shipped (look at the current state of Mozilla)? > Let's face it - anybody who intends to ship a working browser will > need to have enough programmers that the $50K is the least of the problems. > > Yes, this cuts Mozilla out unless somebody pays for their membership. On > the other hand, are there any other *real* contenders for whom $50K would > be a hardship? > > > of the control of HTML to the IETF. Even if that view is not > > shared by the IETF, I the only way I would not be certain that > > a debate on the topic would be healthy for the Internet communty > > would be if the W3C were to take an affirmative stand on issues > > involving microphone upload for language instruction and > > asyncronous audio conferencing. > > Umm.. Microphone upload is the *least* of the many challenges facing > HTML at the current time. > > -- > Valdis Kletnieks > Operating Systems Analyst > Virginia Tech >
Received on Friday, 31 March 2000 01:26:36 UTC