• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 21:19:51 -0400

At 07:35 PM 4/17/2001 -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:

>Of course, since it's been skippable (as happened for a number of XHTML
>specs), it's not really clear how much value is really given to the
>implementation phase that CR is supposed to represent.

I think it's fair to say that some begged for a more formal definition of 
what CR should be, but were told it was vague on purpose.

That, of course, lends to using that flexibility to suit.

Frankly, I still think the entire idea of CR was a mistake, and think I've 
been proven right so far -- that it's gained us very little that we didn't 
get out of the old process, except artificial hurdles.

Ann

• References:
  • RE: W3C press release: comments on standard-setting
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
  • RE: W3C press release: comments on standard-setting
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: So what do SOAP and XML-RPC buy you? (was Re: Massive Cross-Post:The State of XML-RPC, April 2001)
• Next by Date: RE: atoms, molecules
• Previous by thread: RE: W3C press release: comments on standard-setting
• Next by thread: Re: W3C press release: comments on standard-setting
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread