Re: Proposed TAG Finding: Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use

On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 13:57, Tantek =?ISO-8859-1?B?xw==?=elik wrote:
> Logically therefore the TAG should first provide strong wording for web
> sites and web authors (i.e. fix your content and configuration files
> please), rather than browbeat implementers into breaking portions of the
> web.

You know, Tantek's right.  It's pretty obvious that the browser vendors
(aka implementers) control the definitions of what's "broken" or not
broken on the web.

Since that's the case, why don't the spec writers just pack it up and go
home, since the W3C couldn't possibly have a collective understanding of
what the "Web" might be in any sense greater than those who've
implemented it and their understanding of those who use it.

Internet Explorer and its behavior is the Web, right?  We couldn't
possibly assume that the many developers who test their work exclusively
in Internet Explorer are remotely interested in whether their server is
set up properly, so long as it works in IE, right?

Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!

Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2002 15:21:44 UTC