[whatwg] some issues

[Matthew Raymond]

Jim Ley wrote:
> Anyone can join the W3C working group - it either takes cash (not even
> that much) or you can request an invitation as an invited expert, so
> you can actually join the WG, unlike here, where you can just comment
> on the public list - something you can do on W3 lists too.  So on the
> first defintion the W3C is more open than the WHAT-WG IMO.

    So anyone can join W3C...if they happen to have money or popularity. 
That pretty much rules me out. ;)

    As for WHAT WG membership, they'd probably let you in if someone 
invited you. One would hope they won't let you in just because you gave 
them money. That sound corrupt to me.

> The W3C doesn't limit what it's willing to discuss.  The WHAT-WG will
> not change XHTML WF conformancy requirements because "XML is out of
> scope".  So the W3C is more free from more limitations than the
> WHAT-WG.

    Of course! Would you rather have a situation where any idiot could 
come in as a WHAT WG member and demand that the Interactive Fiction 
Markup Language be incorporated into the next version of HTML?

    "It is pitch black! Your CSS might get eaten by a grue!"

    We're racing against the clock. Only by narrowing the scope of this 
group can we hope to get anything accomplished in a reasonable timeframe.