OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: participating communities (Once and for all)

First, no one intended to hurt our Japanese collegues.  Unless I start putting markup around
all statements, sometimes that happens.  Oh well, HumanML has a place on the web after all.
Second, Unicode is not what I was discussing.  I was discussing markup.  Everyone is free
to invent their own version of XML-like languages given the resources of the SGML Declaration.  This would
come at a cost in interoperability and weigh that heavily, but don't ever give up that option.   In
fact, you can't get rid of it unless ISO does that.  They own SGML.  XML is a subset of SGML
owned by the W3C.
Third, "We have had enough of diversity" is a very strong statement.   I suspect there are other
opinions about that.  I won't get into historical cases.  I say only, in my opinion, there are many
things more important than the World Wide Web.  We did fine without it and handled diversity.
If the cost of having it is homegenization of culture, it would be time to turn it off.   This is not a frat house.
The web and the world can support as much as all concerned are willing to support.
As to the W3C, it is a fine organization.  It is one of many that define the working specifications 
and standards that we use.  To refer to it as one did in a recent article, "the governing body of
the Internet" is to overstate its role and its charter.   The more we think in those terms, the
more precarious its position becomes.   What is needed is what we have had for the past
number of years, a balance of different organizations that share members and cooperate on
issues of common interest.  This maintains diversity, ensures that too much power is not
in one domain, and keeps all of the members healthier than they would be otherwise. Preserve
your options.  Keep the commons out of private hands.  If you cannot do this, your
governments will do it for you.  Don't ever think that isn't reality.  It is too much like those
who believed Napster could not be stopped.  There are laws and they work.
Members of world governments have bodyguards.  Their bosses have complete and
well-devised and zealously protected anonymity.   It cannot work any other way.


Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

-----Original Message-----
From: Alireza Kheyrollahi [mailto:aliostad@kavosh.net]

Dear Len,
Thanks for your letter and excuse me for this out of date reply but I was on vacation and I have just arrived. I think we had better turn this off once forever. Feelings of our Japanese colleagues have been hurt and maybe no one is too much to blame. There are two points of view and I believe this is fruitless to go on and on about this.
Dear Len, I see your point. I believe what you are trying to tell us is that "who the hell is this W3C to restrict us, everybody is free to have his own third-party customized version of Unicode" . I hope you see mine too :
We have had enough of diversity, if it is going to be Unicode, it should be Unicode theoretically and practically. And for suer it cannot support all the live and dead languages of the world. If you believe that W3C is not the right organization or does not have the requried technical expertise, it is subject of another discussion.