I reject a proprietary W3C

Ayn Rand followers may believe mans basic right is to the product of his mind, but I do not believe it is right to stand freely on the shoulders of giants and then try to charge others for the view. This is a perfect example of the wealthocracy of capitalism trying to corrupt the meritocracy.

I am tempted to paraphrase:
"In this conflict, there is no neutral ground. If any organisation sponsors proprietary software or standards, they have become proprietary. And they will take that lonely path at their own peril"
But that is too harsh, W3C do not deserve it given all the good they have done in the past, and want to do in the future. If W3C is to repel this privateers attack, they need to be able to point to the community reaction, and opening this insidious proposal for public comment was I assume, that cry for help.

The real foundation of W3C is not the corporate sponsorship which I assume is being brought to bear in this initiative, it is derived from the fact that the Internet Community choose to follow their recommendations. W3C need to reject this proposal or remove the corruptive elements.

And this is but one tactical battle in the war for W3C, which has a strategic funding problem. To have no facility for individual financial contributions is not good. Whether the W3C needs to become part of ISOC (I am a member) or get funding from the UN, they should most definitely not be dependant on a handful of corporations. Otherwise we can expect further attacks of this nature in the future.

Tom Cowap,
pressio.com