- From: Julian Reschke <reschke@muenster.de>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 21:46:05 +0200
- To: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>, "Julian Reschke" <reschke@muenster.de>
- Cc: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, <XML-uri@w3.org>
Joe Kesselman wrote: > From: xml-uri-request@w3.org [mailto:xml-uri-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > keshlam@us.ibm.com > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 9:31 PM > To: Julian Reschke > Cc: Dan Connolly; XML-uri@w3.org > Subject: RE: Divide the problem > > > > Labeling the documents as "experimental" sure would make this easier > > to accept. > > As I understand it, this is part of why the W3C publishes only > Recommendations, not Standards. You shouldn't call something a standard > until it has been widely adopted by the industry and has been used long > enough that you really believe it's stable. Viewed that way, the > entire web > is still in glorified beta-test mode. > > But this distinction has been generally ignored in the mad rush to get > products onto the market and capture eBusiness mindshare. Maybe it's ignored because this is where the W3C ends? For all practical purposes people identify W3C recommendations with standards.
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2000 15:46:07 UTC