Daniel Glazman reports on an IRC discussion where someone complained about the work he did in the HTML Overlays proposal. Now there’s lots wrong with the proposal, which I’ll come onto later, but the complaint seemed to be that this trivial bit of script somehow undermined the W3C like the WHAT-WG and the XFN folk. As people know I really don’t think the WHAT-WG are doing useful work, (see my other posts) but they’re right to be working on HTML 4, they should, and I believe could be doing it within the W3C if it wasn’t for the way they’re going about things, but that’s a seperate matter.
The XFN and this proposal though, I’ve seen no-one complain about on undermining the W3C simply because they’re not! They both work in areas the W3C don’t go near in HTML, XFN because representing human relationships in HTML isn’t something that needs standardising, and HTML Overlays - because it’s a joke technology that cannot degrade.
The problem with the HTML Overlays proposal is not that it’s not from the W3C, it’s just that it’s really not very good, or even original - but then most of the stuff we see isn’t actually original, it’s just a rehash of another idea, so we shouldn’t criticise people for that.