| That was also the first thing on my mind. And I almost lost respect
for Sir Tim for giving tacit assent. I would like to hear more from people connected with W3C over the
years as to why it ran into the long grass. Some commentators have
even described it as "irrelevant today". I'd like to think
that's wrong and W3C has an important future keeping a public
and accessible World Wide Web alive. Among the many questions in my head: What is the "Web" today, 30 years on? What can the W3C realistically do to steward it? Have principles of universality and accessibility been abandoned? Can there be a WORLD WIDE Web in the age of state firewalls and the
"splinternet"? Does the W3C have overlays and censorship resistance on its roadmap? Does the W3C recognise the need for Small Internet technologies,
Gemini and suchlike as a reliable, accessible and simple information
delivery network? |