- From: Brian Kelly <B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 17:39:41 +0100
- To: 'Alex Rousskov' <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
> > It's becoming unclear to me with the QA group is the technical > > marketing wing of W3C or an honest balanced broker of > advice, covering > > legitimate concerns over deployment issues. > > > > I would prefer the latter approach (I think the former > approach will > > lead to dangers of W3C being marginalised - a sentiment I > hear fairly > > frequently). > > I would expect W3C bias and would have no problems with it as > long as it is explicit. It is perfectly fine for a W3C WG to > be a biased advocate of W3C technologies, but it is not > morally acceptable for a WG to engage in FUD wars, IMO. Yes, I too would expect bias, and have no problems with it. It's not clear to me how such bias would be made explicit, though, unless, as I suggested, you're referered to acknowledging implementation difficulties. This is an area W3C have not traditionally addresses (except through WAI, which used phrases such as "until user agents ..."). W3C has in the past developed the standards and has a disinterested view on application support for their standards. Brian > Alex. >
Received on Friday, 17 October 2003 12:39:33 UTC