2 ms·

This just redefines the web to include, for instance, all excel documents because they can be linked to on a web page and my OS will automatically open them in

This just redefines the web to include, for instance, all excel documents because they can be linked to on a web page and my OS will automatically open them in excel. Which means the web is really all digitized information and can never be harmed because it's just a Deep Link away. That's fine, but not a particularly useful definition (you could just refer to "all data formats that have a program that can display them") and it completely misses the worries of the GP around "the free and open nature of the web".

JimDabell 11y ago
> This just redefines the web I'm not redefining anything, I'm correcting a (very common) misconception. This is how Tim Berners-Lee defines the Web, and how it's described by the W3C. I know this is not how you are used to thinking about the web, but that is how it is defined by its creator and its governing standards body. > all excel documents because they can be linked to on a web page If you put an Excel document on a website, is it not on the Web? > Which means the web is really all digitized information and can never be harmed because it's just a Deep Link away. You're putting words in my mouth – I didn't say that. > That's fine, but not a particularly useful definition It is; this definition isn't nearly as all-encompassing as you appear to assume. It excludes many types of native application, and it also excludes lots of things that are commonly referred to as web content. For instance, content that you can find by clicking through an SPA but is not otherwise addressable shouldn't really be thought of as on the web, even if you can find a way to make it appear in a browser. If it's not addressable, it's not on the web. > it completely misses the worries of the GP around "the free and open nature of the web". I'm not missing them, I'm clarifying the context. This really isn't about whether it's on the web or not and arguments going down that path are missing the point.

JimDabell 11y ago

> This just redefines the web I'm not redefining anything, I'm correcting a (very common) misconception. This is how Tim Berners-Lee defines the Web, and how it's described by the W3C. I know this is not how you are used to thinking about the web, but that is how it is defined by its creator and its governing standards body. > all excel documents because they can be linked to on a web page If you put an Excel document on a website, is it not on the Web? > Which means the web is really all digitized information and can never be harmed because it's just a Deep Link away. You're putting words in my mouth – I didn't say that. > That's fine, but not a particularly useful definition It is; this definition isn't nearly as all-encompassing as you appear to assume. It excludes many types of native application, and it also excludes lots of things that are commonly referred to as web content. For instance, content that you can find by clicking through an SPA but is not otherwise addressable shouldn't really be thought of as on the web, even if you can find a way to make it appear in a browser. If it's not addressable, it's not on the web. > it completely misses the worries of the GP around "the free and open nature of the web". I'm not missing them, I'm clarifying the context. This really isn't about whether it's on the web or not and arguments going down that path are missing the point.