Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@c...> wrote: | By posting here on xml-dev, I am asking someone representing the Linking | WG to step in and make a public statement, just as Steven Pemberton | commented on the views of the HTML WG. Could we expect to hear anything except "What's the problem?"? Regarding B2, I think the response could be a counter-challenge. After all, you need merely put some ATTLISTs with xlink:whatever in, and then consult a PE maven to grind the details. | XLink has done more than any other effort to educate about the possibilites | of linking beyond <a href=.. This stuff is too important to stay hidden | away. The W3C does not work that way. It's an industry consortium, not an open forum. Nevertheless, you are expected to take it on faith that politics are not a factor, and nothing is "too important" not to be hidden if that would oil the gears of W3C process better. Consider this exchange: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Jan/0244.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Jan/0247.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Jan/0248.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Jan/0250.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2000Jan/0252.html (I realized that my basic point, "If it's fundamental technology, it can't be confidential.", was never going to be addressed.)
|
