This group has no effect on the language that is actually used in
products. Even when we publish a standard, there is no incentive
for exist products to conform to it unless the standard exactly
defines the behavior already in use on all products, in which case
the "standard" simply becomes a collection of descriptions of what
various products do (different for each product, of course).
The letters from w3 made it quite clear that the "job" of this group
is to suggest minor changes in features being added by big players
in the market, and it's also clear that if the companies don't like
the changes, they certainly won't make them (REL/REV). The primary
function of this group has become to simply exist, so that companies
can claim to be using the "standards process." They're using it all
right.
People have expressed the view that we should press on with the process
but haven't addressed the problem that this isn't a standards process
anymore. It's a group of companies making their own decisions, then
dumping poorly thought-through standards on the group. The group can't
refuse to include them, because the companies will just stick them in
anyway and all documents will continue to be nonstandard. So no matter
what the extention is, the group's hand is forced by the w3 companies.
I would very much like a standard as well. I've refused to use Netscape
because I don't like what the company is doing and I believe strongly
in standardization, but people look at me like I'm from Mars when I tell
them I still use Mosaic. But the only way this group is going to be
able to produce a standard is if one company forces the others out of
business, creating one "standard." The real process simply isn't in the
interest of the profitability of the companies.
Steven
-- Steven Fought UW Madison Computer Sciences Webmaster http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~keeper/