3 ms·

Can't answer that tbh, but really, W3C is nearly irrelevant today and lives on only in the minds of people who have this idea that so-called web standards are

Can't answer that tbh, but really, W3C is nearly irrelevant today and lives on only in the minds of people who have this idea that so-called web standards are created by W3C. W3C is into CSS still (on life support, and arguably, to avoid the bad looks of a single "browser vendor" dominating the show). But eg W3C's last involvement with HTML was three years ago [1], and their last HTML recommendation was based on WHATWG HTML snapshot January, 2020 [2]. You can check the barren place that is W3C's site yourself. I wouldn't put forth W3C as a shining example of standardization, to say the least, given the state of the web and browser diversity. Also, you've got to understand that ISO is a complicated association of national "standard bodies" of varying legal statue, held together by international treaties. Nothing is easy and quick in that kind of environment; it's a miracle that it can produce something at all in this day and age. A way of motivating domain experts to become standard editors in the past has been to sell the standard text at high enough prices, such that the editor's own privately published book (containing a commented version of the standard text) would sell better. Now whether the world needs another graph query language I'm not sure tbh. Certainly, I thought that creating a standard from scratch by committee was deemed less desired when Prolog (and Datalog) exist, as ISO standards even. W3C had put a lot of effort into RDF/SPARQL, and TBL' involvement with graph knowledge bases predates even WWW [3]. [1]: https://github.com/w3c/htmlwg https://github.com/w3c/htmlwg [2]: https://sgmljs.net/docs/html200129.html https://sgmljs.net/docs/html200129.html and https://sgmljs.net/docs/html230116.html https://sgmljs.net/docs/html230116.html [3]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENQUIRE https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENQUIRE

chrisandchris 2y ago
And still, I already paid the ISO standard (at least to some degree, in my country) by paying taxes and I still have to pay for a standard? It's like having to pay for research I already paid for with my taxes... oh wait!
- tannhaeuser 2y ago
  In my country, the ISO member org engaging in standardization (a pretty well-known one) isn't funded by taxes at all but is a non-profit, funded by member fees. Even assuming the work of standardization bodies were tax-financed, that by itself still doesn't imply standards should be free of charge. It's the same thing when you have to pay a certain amount for any state or communal service you're receiving as an individual or business, such as idk real estate transactions or traffic management for construction or events, even though the service is performed by an authority or stage agency.

chrisandchris 2y ago

And still, I already paid the ISO standard (at least to some degree, in my country) by paying taxes and I still have to pay for a standard? It's like having to pay for research I already paid for with my taxes... oh wait!

tannhaeuser 2y ago
In my country, the ISO member org engaging in standardization (a pretty well-known one) isn't funded by taxes at all but is a non-profit, funded by member fees. Even assuming the work of standardization bodies were tax-financed, that by itself still doesn't imply standards should be free of charge. It's the same thing when you have to pay a certain amount for any state or communal service you're receiving as an individual or business, such as idk real estate transactions or traffic management for construction or events, even though the service is performed by an authority or stage agency.