4 ms·
"Probably because the W3C literally copy/pastes other's work and claims it for their own. Look at this blog post, which doesn't credit WHATWG at all for doing t
by bootload 10y ago
"Probably because the W3C literally copy/pastes other's work and claims it for their own. Look at this blog post, which doesn't credit WHATWG at all for doing the actual work of speccing HTML."
Does WHATWG put a licence their work?
- Touche 10y agoI don't know or care, I didn't claim that W3C is breaking a license, just that they are taking other people's work and claiming it as their own. That you can't see the difference between these things is not anything I can help you with.
- bootload 10y ago"I didn't claim that W3C is breaking a license, just that they are taking other people's work and claiming it as their own." The only reason I ask? If there's a license you can force the W3C to display it. I can see what you're getting at, and if the W3C as an organisation is stupid enough to make claims on ideas from WHATWG they should be reminded and forced to acknowledge this through law. One way to do this is enforcement by license.
- tannhaeuser 10y agoIt's absurd to think that W3C is claiming WHATWG's work as their own. W3C specs are read by relatively few people who generally know about the text provenance and its relationship with WHATWG specs.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]