- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:18:58 -0500
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 00:04:22 +0200, Robin Berjon wrote: > I would shy away from that comparison though. For starters, you can't > quite leave North Korea as you can leave Amazon. But perhaps more to > the point, the side-effects of such technologies are not necessarily > the ones that one would expect if following the overly simplistic > assumption that if it can go bad it will. I think that Opera Mini's > usage statistics tell an interesting story about censorship > circumvention for instance. > > That is not to say that we should be rosy eyed and naïve, simply that > such analogies can only lead to caricatural conclusions in a complex > — > and increasingly so — mesh of a situation. Rather, we need to find a > way to implement checks and balances. Agreed, but it's devaluing the Web, and that makes me cranky. >> I will reiterate (for the nth time) that it would be valuable for >> the W3C to specify what a "browser" is, in the sense of what >> protocols, formats and standards it supports and uses when you feed it >> a URL. Then it could point a finger at Amazon and say "that's not a >> browser, and it's bad because..." > > And what force would that carry? There is no definition that would > carry the force of "you should not do X because it is contrary to > human dignity". Any definition of a browser would necessarily be > highly convoluted, biased, probably wrong, extremely debatable, and > impenetrable to most. Even if you did reach consensus on a > definition, > you could wag your finger all day long and no one will care. From > what > I can tell, for all intents and purposes, Silk is a browser. I can > browser the Web with it. It works. That it happens on my machine or > on > some kind of weird clustering technology that I don't understand is > hardly part of the picture. In an alternate Universe, the W3C would have more control over the brand that is "the Web" (e.g., with a certification program, which is a notoriously difficult place for a standards body to go). I'm not sure if it would be a better or worse universe. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 28 September 2011 22:19:21 UTC