[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Arjun Ray <aray@q2.net>
- To: xml-dev@xml.org
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 00:19:27 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Michael Champion wrote:
> [...] are the Groves advocates just so totally cynical about the
> W3C process that they don't think it's worthwhile to raise points
> such as the one Eliot Kimber makes to the InfoSet people, do you
> do so privately and get the same non-response that Nils seems to
> have gotten, do you not care what the InfoSet WG recommends, or
> what?
What.
It's not that I don't care. My caring is confined to figuring out
whether a Rec from the W3C is an Irresistible Force or an Immovable
Object. It's past - if not well past - the point where it could be
worthwhile to "raise points": if it's an IF, I get out of the way, and
if it's an IM, I find things easier to nudge. This is not cynicism.
This is Damage Control.
And no, I'm not confident enough about my understanding of groves to
be an advocate. (But what little I do understand tells me that a lot
of stuff at the W3C has simply gone off the deep end. Of course -um-
architects can't discern that from 50000 ft.)
Arjun
|
