xml-dev - Re: sunshine and standards development

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

Mike Champion wrote:
>In this scheme of things, the problem is that people see the W3C 
>as both crafting technologies out of thin air and having their 
>Recommendations treated as if they were standards.

Exactly.  The results of the 'research lab' are posted as more-or-less
final, and only in rare cases (like ISO HTML) is there another process
creating STANDARD standards on top of them.

>These activities MUST be separate, as much as it would be 
>convenient for us all to move directly from revolutionary 
>technology advances to universally accepted standards without 
>a period of chaotic natural selection in the middle.

It's convenient to move directly, and it does seem to give the W3C a strong
selling point for getting people to buy memberships.  Unfortunately, those
activities ARE NOT separate in reality, whatever the documents may say on
the surface.

I plead guilty to describing the W3C as a 'standards organization' in cases
where it's proven convenient (though more or less true), notably as a
member of the Web Standards Project Steering Committee, which cajoles and
pleads with browser vendors to conform to HTML 4.0, DOM Level One, CSS1,
and XML 1.0.

However, recognizing the W3C's de facto status as standards builder also
opens the door to asking for accountability, so I'd suggest it might be
wise for the W3C to pick a direction in the near future.  Riding the wave
of prestige created by being a de facto standards builder while denying
that any responsibility comes with that prestige doesn't sound like a
long-term recipe for harmony.

>I personally would like to see the W3C more open to outside 
>involvement at the "ad hoc" end of the continuum, 

I'd love to see the W3C more open, even encouraging, about publishing Notes
from non-member groups that have something to contribute, and much stricter
about letting its members confuse documents submitted as Notes with results
of W3C process.

>more determined to 
>take time to get specs right (with clear prose, extensive 
>implementation experience, etc.) before they become Recommendations, 

I think everyone would like to see the specs turn out right.

>and perhaps more willing to defer to the ISO on the really messy 
>business of casting Recommendations into concrete Standards.

There have been a number of questions about ISO's fitness for this task -
I'd love to see some of the more ISO-aware folks here talk about how such
relations work and what might be done to improve them.

>Nevertheless, as long as the W3C serves as the "treaty 
>organization" within which pragmatic compromises that 
>result in consensual Recommendations are made, I don't 
>believe that more "sunshine" would help.

Then perhaps it's time for the W3C to leave the treaty organization
business, and focus on technical innovation. 

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