- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:55:03 +0000
- To: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[Simon Fraser:] > > On Feb 7, 2012, at 8:35 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > > > On 2/7/12 2:29 PM, Dean Jackson wrote: > >> I'm not sure if you're suggesting that Apple intentionally held up > >> the standards process to get an advantage over other implementors, or > >> that simply it would theoretically be possible (and perhaps > >> advantageous) to do so (and in your non-hypothetical world, it > >> happened whether intentional or not). > > > > The latter. As far as I can tell it was simply a matter of Apple having > no particular incentive to push the spec forward, and hence not doing it. > I certainly don't think there was malice involved; I'm sorry that wasn't > clear. > > I would also like to add that other potential implementors could have > requested the addition of more editors to the specs much earlier, but did > not do so. The blame is not entirely on Apple's shoulders. > First, you're welcome to ask for help. Second, we're certainly doing that where it's most obvious more editors are needed. See Animations. If you do think you need more editorial help, please let the group know. >From my end, the goal is not to engage in some 'blamestorming' session. I'm not really interested in whether Apple had some malicious agenda to lock in users or if this is all a pure externality where Apple reaps the benefits at everyone else's expense. We need to work through the consequences. And I'd rather do that with Apple seating at the table.
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2012 20:11:29 UTC