Comments on: Why Not W3C or IETF? http://www.links.org/?p=351 Ben Laurie blathering Fri, 27 Aug 2010 13:41:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Standardizing on a standards body « Random Oracle http://www.links.org/?p=351&cpage=1#comment-221776 Standardizing on a standards body « Random Oracle Mon, 04 Aug 2008 01:42:32 +0000 http://www.links.org/?p=351#comment-221776 [...] Laurie seeks to preempt that question, also raised in the discussion group. Jury is out on the characterization of W3C as [...] [...] Laurie seeks to preempt that question, also raised in the discussion group. Jury is out on the characterization of W3C as [...]

]]> By: James A. Donald http://www.links.org/?p=351&cpage=1#comment-220223 James A. Donald Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:34:40 +0000 http://www.links.org/?p=351#comment-220223 The problem is not idiots, but that when a group exceeds a certain size the group as a whole becomes idiotic. The largest sized group that can actually design anything is about three people. The success of linux is largely due to the personal dictatorship of Linus, recently illustrated and demonstrated by the story of Git. The "working code" part of the IEEE credo tended to drastically limit the number of contributors, thereby resulting in groups that could actually function. The problem is not idiots, but that when a group exceeds a certain size the group as a whole becomes idiotic.

The largest sized group that can actually design anything is about three people. The success of linux is largely due to the personal dictatorship of Linus, recently illustrated and demonstrated by the story of Git.

The “working code” part of the IEEE credo tended to drastically limit the number of contributors, thereby resulting in groups that could actually function.

]]> By: Russell Nelson http://www.links.org/?p=351&cpage=1#comment-219166 Russell Nelson Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:47:26 +0000 http://www.links.org/?p=351#comment-219166 Yeah, I brought up the IETF's "No Fool Left Behind" participation policy at the Open Web Foundation BOF at OSCON. Brian Behlendorf pointed out that the IETF was successful for many years, and cloning a restart of it might not be a bad idea. Yeah, I brought up the IETF’s “No Fool Left Behind” participation policy at the Open Web Foundation BOF at OSCON. Brian Behlendorf pointed out that the IETF was successful for many years, and cloning a restart of it might not be a bad idea.

]]> By: Kai Hendry http://www.links.org/?p=351&cpage=1#comment-217154 Kai Hendry Sun, 27 Jul 2008 19:09:10 +0000 http://www.links.org/?p=351#comment-217154 What's wrong with W3C's royalty free policy? If you want the W3C, though more open, try the <a href="http://whatwg.org" rel="nofollow">WHATWG</a>. What’s wrong with W3C’s royalty free policy?

If you want the W3C, though more open, try the WHATWG.

]]> By: djm http://www.links.org/?p=351&cpage=1#comment-216988 djm Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:09:43 +0000 http://www.links.org/?p=351#comment-216988 Oh yes. I can think of at least two IETF working groups that have had specifications significantly delayed or ruined outright by people with big ideas but no implementation experience. It is a pity that the "... and running code" part of the IETF credo has been largely jettisoned - it is a good filter for bad specifications and cranks alike. Oh yes.

I can think of at least two IETF working groups that have had specifications significantly delayed or ruined outright by people with big ideas but no implementation experience. It is a pity that the “… and running code” part of the IETF credo has been largely jettisoned – it is a good filter for bad specifications and cranks alike.

]]>