[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com> 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.)
|
