I believe in standards to a degree. Web pages have to communicate first, then maybe put on a show second. But then, what is, being too “nitpicky”? Is it too nitpicky to say “different than” but *not* to nitpicky to say “you is”? And who’s the source of such a standard: the OED, or Webster’s?

If we get rid of the W3, then each browser is free to go its own way, and my web page isn’t guaranteed to show up on cousin Bill’s browser in Michigan: what a shame!

I want to be able to read Eric’s lessons on CSS and maybe even not have to read the parts he wrote on CSS hacks and his notes about how IE misinterprets the box model.

As far as standards, I think the W3 has an at least titular role (somewhat recognized by vendors) as does the UN (somewhat recognized by nations).

I just went through “Leaving W3C QA” again, just for the sheer pleasure of it. Lovely … re-vitalizes my faith in human nature, it does. I definitely owe Bjoern a tankard of his favorite.

Who, who, who took note of the effort evidenced in that document? A DavidB would, a BrendanE would, a Hixie would … like you would … but that’s about it. Know what? I’ll bet TimbBL would, too.

But there’s something else operating here too: my gawd, maybe you don’t realize the awe you inspire … “Box Model Hack” and such. You and tantek? Guys like you are what inspired me (past tense, note) to keep sloggin’. (So on the day I set up and read through a 250 page technical document and produce with a long list of quibbles large and small. *shrug* Nobody much cares? Fine. But I know that I’ve guarded your back. Now’days you got bigger fish to fry? *shrug* Hey, no blame. But: I quit. Past tense. Done deal … a long while back.)

Copying texts into illuminated tomes was humble work. Such is it with tech_docs.

“Only notice when the well is dry.” Yaaa, well I’ been in “camel” mode for a lotta years.

I really don’t believe that decentralisation of standards is a good thing.

If you don’t think Jeffrey was clear in what he wanted, you need to read his post again, because what he wants is spelled out. As for what I want, that will have to wait until I have time to write a follow-up post.

And your bridge analogy wasn’t at all clear to me. Sorry.

I read your post, Zeldman’s, Molly’s, others and I have to ask: what do you want? What exactly do you want from the W3C? How is you want it to change? If you no longer think it’s viable, what would you want in its place? None of you are clear in what you want.

Should we stop, toss W3C out? Go with surival of the fittest tech? Wait until IE7 and Firefox duke it out and then climb over the bodies left over after yet another browser war?

Hunt around for yet more obscure standards organizations, which we can then pack with people who agree with us? Turn it all over to the tech obsessed.

Letsee — lets toss JavaScript out and make some form of Python/Ruby hybrid that will be so COOL. Let’s also make sure it’s too hard for the average web page developer: too many of THOSE around.

Is this what you want?

I’ve seen the microformat effort as a solution and a replacement, and I can’t believe that any of you are taking this seriously. The microformat effort is an interesting use of technology, but all of it–all of it–is based on the underlying technologies that have coe out of the W3C. That’s like telling a bridge painter, “Hey! You did a great job! You should be an engineer! I’d walk across any bridge you’d build!”

What do you want?

Suppose you have been given control of the W3C. What would you change?

Well I’d quite like to see CSS 2.1 finished, let alone CSS3. It would also be nice if large member organisations didn’t hold so much sway over the decision making powers of the organisation. Think WCAG 2.0.