Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Ann Navarro wrote: > This is neither a personal attack nor a deprecation of others > work. It is > simply a statement of conflicting demands upon the W3C: "Be > fast!" and "Be > far more open!" -- the two don't work well together, in my > opinion, and > IETF I believes shows that the "any and all comers" model > produces work > more slowly. Be that as it may, it could be argued quite easily that the W3C as it currently stands is neither fast nor open. I wouldn't label the contributions of W3C advocates to this type of discussion as universally personal attacks or deprecation of other people's work, but one thing that I have definitely never seen is any indication whatsoever that the constant stream of dissatisfaction expressed by many parties has translated into even the slightest willingness among the W3C powers-that-be to consider that some changes might be apt, let alone any action in this direction. I personally don't feel that the W3C has to be "far more open". I'm receptive to the idea that too much openness can impede progress. At the same time, I can't even take seriously the idea that an organization as important and high-profile as the W3C can't be significantly improved. There's a continuum here: it's not a question of being open or closed, it's a question of finding the optimal level of openness. Judging by the frequency of criticism of existing procedures, the current level ain't it. Matthew PS: I wrote a rant over a year ago about just this topic in case someone is interested: http://www.schemantix.com/resources/xml_2.html.
|
