• From: Jonathan.Robie@S...
• To: simonstl@s..., xml-dev@x...
• Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:34:32 -0400

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

> Intel's position appears to be the only aspect of the
> model substantially different from the W3C.

Well, Intel's position is precisely what the people in the article were complaining about. Since this is substantially different from the W3C, I find the parallel a little weak.

> What I find notable is that a community of developers
> (finally) voiced their lack of interest in such
> centralizing and exclusive processes.

The quotes in the article suggest that Intel should not propose an organization where the big players have all the power, and point Intel to the IETF and the W3C as good examples to follow.

In Intel's model, if you pay more money to participate, you get more power. In the W3C model, big companies pay a lot, small companies pay much less, and everyone gets the same vote.

Clearly, there are fans of the IETF model, and fans of the W3C model. Both groups have produced influential and useful standards.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: standards body parallel
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: standards body parallel
• Next by Date: RE: standards body parallel
• Previous by thread: RE: standards body parallel
• Next by thread: RE: standards body parallel
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread