• From: Matt Sergeant <matt@s...>
• To: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>
• Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:35:15 +0000 (GMT)

On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Benjamin Franz wrote:

> I'm sorry. It's a duck. Political cover for people who choose not to
> *conform* to standards while claiming to support them isn't a good reason
> to twist the language. Commonality of usage of terms is a *fundamental*
> basis for communication. Down the road of 'a word means precisely what I
> want it to mean, neither more nor less' lays Alice. What happens when *I*
> redefine the word 'recommendation' to mean 'to go down the rabbit hole'?

Its a politics issue. If the W3C were not a vendor organisation we'd
probably all be willing to call them standards. While they remain a boy's
club, I'd prefer to call them recommendations.

-- 
<Matt/>

    /||    ** Founder and CTO  **  **   http://axkit.com/     **
   //||    **  AxKit.com Ltd   **  ** XML Application Serving **
  // ||    ** http://axkit.org **  ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP  **
 // \\| // ** mod_perl news and resources: http://take23.org  **
     \\//
     //\\
    //  \\

• References:
  • Re: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
    • From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Is whitespace within general entities ignorable?
• Next by Date: RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Previous by thread: Re: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Next by thread: Re: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread