On 14 Jan 2014, at 22:07, Markus Demmel <[email protected]> wrote: > Or in programmers terms: a fork? (maybe with some later added specs from the > W3C)
Before anyone gets enthusiastic about the idea: please remember the significant difference between forking open source software and forking an open standard. A fork of the web platform means a world of interoperability issues. Think: browser wars. It is hard to see how that can be a better option than an interoperable web platform which includes unpleasant features or badly designed components. Interoperability, not purity is the main objective of an open standard. A fork should always, always be the worst case scenario. Thanks, — Olivier ----------------------------- http://www.bbc.co.uk This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -----------------------------
