Re: Why "color"

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Rainer Åhlfors
<rahlfors@wildcatsoftware.net> wrote:
> My goodness! Don't even go there!
>
> There is a reason it is called a "standard". As the creator of that
> standard, W3C can use whichever language they choose.

I think it not so simple, whether viewed in legal or ethical terms.

> And, no, don't involve lawyers. They mess things up with technicalities that
> no one cares about.

"The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal, not what's right. And
I'll stick to what's legal. . . . I'm not God. The currents and eddies
of right and wrong, which you find such plain-sailing, I can't
navigate, I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of the law, oh there I'm
a forester. . . . What would you do? Cut a great road through the law
to get after the Devil? . . . And when the last law was down, and the
Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the laws all
being flat? . . . This country's planted thick with laws from coast to
coast - Man's laws, not God's - and if you cut them down . . . d'you
really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow
them? . . . Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own
safety's sake."

R. Bolt, A Man for All Seasons, Act I, p. 147 (Three Plays, Heinemann
ed. 1967), as quoted in in Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437
U.S. 153, 195-196 (1978),
<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=437&invol=153>.

I'd appreciate it if you refrained from lumping all lawyers in the
same basket. Some are attack dogs; some are trying to build a better
world. For example, Mahatma Ghandi was a lawyer. Would you dismiss his
quest for recognition of the civil rights of citizens in British
colonies as mere "technicalities?"

A good part of the reason W3C has lawyers is to prevent legal disputes
from ever arising. Likewise, I always felt I did my best work when I
could get a client's dispute resolved without litigation.

An issue was raised on this list. I recognized that it had legal
aspects and suggested that those aspects be referred to W3C counsel
for guidance. I suggested no particular resolution of the issue. And I
explained the legal question I perceived so that people might
understand why I suggested the consultation.

You may dismiss the core substantive provisions of an international
treaty that some 100-plus nations have agreed to and which governs
your work at W3C as a technicality. But those who ignore the law do so
at their own risk.

Best regards,

Paul

-- 
Universal Interoperability Council
<http:www.universal-interop-council.org>

Received on Thursday, 19 February 2009 19:14:57 UTC