- From: Rob Lanphier <robla@real.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 13:49:19 -0700
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>, "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
At 02:32 PM 10/9/01 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote: >At 11:11 AM 10/9/01 -0600, Alex Rousskov wrote: >> 10. Big companies start arguing that their competitors are >> abusing test suites. They also realize the opportunity >> to narrow down the competition using legal barriers. >> 11. W3C designates an independent 3rd party to administer the >> tests. Now the testing is fair and impartial. >> 12. An independent 3rd party charges $$$ to verify conformance, >> blocking the way for small developers to make any legal >> conformance claims > >Anecdote. For many years, I ran a small (5-person) technology company. A >trade associate (ATA) said they wanted their suppliers certified (a >certification service was available from a 3rd party). We were the first >company to get certified, thinking of it as a competitive advantage. I >actually think that peoples' willingness to get certified was in inverse >proportion to the company size. I agree with Lofton's hunch here. The bigger the company, the easier it is for them to unilaterally define what FooML is. Small companies without brand recognition are usually the ones that need to bootstrap their brand off of the W3C or like body. Rob
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 16:49:33 UTC