to RFC or not (was: Re: Toward Closure on HTML )

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Apr 94-present
• Next message: Jim Davis: "Re: Toward Closure on HTML"
• Previous message: Stan Letovsky: "Re: Toward Closure on HTML "
• Maybe in reply to: Martijn Koster: "to RFC or not (was: Re: Toward Closure on HTML )"
• Reply: Larry Masinter: "Re: to RFC or not (was: Re: Toward Closure on HTML )"

Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 19:02:27 --100
Message-id: <199404051659.QAA04491@threejane>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: marca@eit.COM
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: marca@eit.COM (Marc Andreessen)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: to RFC or not (was: Re: Toward Closure on HTML )
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 589

> In Dan's elaborate message he wrote:
> 
> > "OWNERSHIP" OF THE STANDARD
> 
> > Making HTML an internet standards-track RFC involves more overhead
> > than is warranted. In the future, the HTML specification will be
> > published as informational RFCs (FYI documents) from the WWW team at
> > CERN. 

With all due respect to Tim and the CERN team, I am currently dubious
of the idea that they will have the time to pursue this at the level I
think a lot of us feel it deserves (standards-track or not).  I feel
the community should do what it can to distribute the effort involved.

Marc