xml-dev - RE: standards body parallel

["Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>]

At 02:34 PM 10/13/00 -0400, Jonathan.Robie@SoftwareAG-USA.com wrote: 
>
> 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.


You're welcome to read the article as painting the W3C as an angel.  I
certainly didn't get that feeling from it, but recognize that we come from
rather different perspectives.

Again, I'm happiest to see that developers are questioning the wisdom of
centralized models in which the big players play key roles.  Given that very
few people who use W3C specs notice the W3C, much less examine its structures
closely, I'll take it as a sign that some communities are very much awake.

>
> 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.


Not being an insider at the W3C, I have to speculate, but there are persistent
rumors that companies with larger market share do in fact receive considerably
more deference than smaller firms whose role in making standards succeed or
fail is considered less substantial.

That may just be realpolitik, of course.

I found it telling that a rep from Cisco, not an independent, was suggesting
the W3C as a role model.


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


Agreed. 
Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books