>> Twenty-five years ago I was part of an effort… to develop a standard environment for the exchange of business documents called #ebXML. It was an open-standards internet follow-on to #EDI. … an environment in which all the actual business transactions were between machines, without the need for human…
Then, @timbl and #W3C invented the #SemanticWeb and #OWL reasoners, which I can't help but see as a precursor to the current AI push, and a continuation of that way of thinking
Something I wrote in the W3C Authentic Web Mini Workshop’s Zoom chat:
Another implicit assumption (flaw) that is often a part of "purely technical solutions" is the neglect or ignorance (innocent naïveté) of existing technical solutions.
A technical proposal should not be praised for what it claims to solve.
A technical proposal must be evaluated by what marginal difference or advantage does it provide over existing technologies.
Any technical proposal that ignores prior technologies is itself doomed to be ignored by the next technical proposal.
In addition to the slide presentations (links to come) in the mini workshop and Zoom verbal discussion which was minuted (link to come), there was a lot of very interesting discussion in the Zoom chat, which was not minuted. Sometimes such quick back & forth can help inspire summarizing of points which one had not previously written down.
I was encouraged by a fellow workshop participant to blog this one so here it is!
#W3C #credweb #credibleWeb #authenticWeb #technology #technical #proposal #technicalProposal #history
I just participated in the first W3C Authentic Web Mini Workshop¹ hosted by the Credible Web Community Group² (of which I’m a longtime member) and up front I noted that our very discussion itself needed to be careful about its own credibility, extra critical of any technologies discussed or assertions made, and initially identified two flaws to avoid on a meta level, having seen them occur many times in technical or standards discussions:
1. Politician’s Syllogism — "Something must be done about this problem. Here is something, let's do it!"
2. Solutions Looking For Problems — "I am interested in how tech X can solve problem Y"
After some back and forth and arguments in the Zoom chat, I observed participants questioning speakers of arguments rather than the arguments themselves, so I had to identify a third fallacy to avoid:
3. Ad Hominem — while obvious examples are name-calling (which is usually against codes of conduct), less obvious examples (witnessed in the meeting) include questioning a speaker’s education (or lack thereof) like what they have or have not read, or would benefit from reading.
I am blogging these here both as a reminder (should you choose to participate in such discussions), and as a resource to cite in future discussions.
We need to all develop expertise in recognizing these logical and methodological flaws & fallacies, and call them out when we see them, especially when used against others.
We need to promptly prune these flawed methods of discussion, so we can focus on actual productive, relevant, and yes, credible discussions.
#W3C #credweb #credibleWeb #authenticWeb #flaw #fallacy #fallacies #logicalFallacy #logicalFallacies
Glossary
Ad Hominem
attacking an attribute of the person making an argument rather than the argument itself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Politician's syllogism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism
Solutions Looking For Problems (related: #solutionism, #solutioneering)
Promoting a technology that either has not identified a real problem for it to solve, or actively pitching a specific technology to any problem that seems related. Wikipedia has no page on this but has two related pages:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_fix
Wikipedia does have an essay on this specific to Wikipedia:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Solutions_looking_for_a_problem
Stack Exchange has a thread on "solution in search of a problem":
* https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/250320/a-word-that-means-a-solution-in-search-of-a-problem
Forbes has an illustrative anecdote:
* https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephanieburns/2019/05/28/solution-looking-for-a-problem/
References
¹ https://www.w3.org/events/workshops/2025/authentic-web-workshop/
² https://credweb.org/ and https://www.w3.org/community/credibility/
Previously in 2019 I participated in #MisinfoCon:
* https://tantek.com/2019/296/t1/london-misinfocon-discuss-spectrum-recency
* https://tantek.com/2019/296/t2/misinfocon-roundtable-spectrums-misinformation
With WAI and WCAG the @w3c is arguably one of the biggest accessibility rights advocates out there.
W3C is also incorporated in the USA which seeks to abolish accessibility programs.
Asking the inconvenient questions:
Is W3C safe from Trump’s and Musk’s thug gangs currently overtaking the US government?
Is it time to consider moving the W3C to a less fascist place? I’ve heard the EU is still kinda ok. You might even consider going “true neutral” in Switzerland.
Since 2009, I've been contributing to open web tools & standards, with a focus on CSS and related platform features at the W3C. But that work takes resources, making it hard for independent contributors like us @OddBird to stay involved.
We need support. If you appreciate what we're doing, you (or your company) can sponsor our work directly:
https://opencollective.com/oddbird-open-source
Let's keep building an open web for everyone.
As you see there is plurality, but there is nothing easy about building a web engine.
Rendering HTML via DOM, implementing JS parsing, all the modern #JS standards, the #HTTPS protocol, every #W3C standard that hasn't been deprecated. It's a big, big task to build something like this.
Shout outs to #Ladybird. That slipped my mind completely, a bottom up rewrite - which is insane.
In any case, there are engines a plenty...
So why not build a browser?
A draft of ‘W3C Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile’ is now available!
We’d really love your comments on the document in GitHub- we want to make sure these guidelines are clear for *everyone* who works on building mobile applications.
#accessibility #a11y #w3c #wcag
#iStatMenu で有名な #bjango の #Pinwheel というアプリ良さそう。
https://bjango.com/mac/pinwheel/
カラートークンみたいなものを生成・管理することができるんだけど、色の濃淡をイージングパスみたいなグラフィカルな UI で作成できて、コントラストのアクセシビリティチェックもできる（これができる単体アプリ探してた）
あと、 #W3C のコミュニティーグループがドラフトを検討してるデザイントークンのオープンなフォーマット #DesignTokensJSON のインポート・エクスポートにも対応してる。
さっそく試用中 
In case you're lost, here is the map.
Source of the mindmap:
The #W3C has a WAI effort, which really stands for "Web Accessibility Initiative", but I always read it as "Working As Intended". 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/
@frankstrater @dansup @peertube
Other than that.. I started calling current AS/AP fedi the "as soon as possible" fediverse, where necessarily early app implementations served as the de-facto reference implementations for the #W3C #ActivityStreams and #ActivityPub open standards.
At serious cost: Ever increasing #ProtocolDecay and subsequent #WhackaMoleAdoption i.e. retaining app-by-app interop pipes against moving release targets.
When is Video domain getting standardized? That's my question.
Super excited to see (after years of my involvement and maybe decade of @sundress’s along with MANY other passionate and patient individuals) the web getting a little more accessible: https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/pull/39742 
What is the status of Bluesky's stated goal of moving ATProto over to the IETF or W3C to govern? I haven't seen news about this.
It does not matter so much if it is #SOLID or #ActivityPub or both or any.
But the Vision matters most in these dark times
„The Vision of a new World“ by @timbl
„That said, there is clearly a massive revolution taking place, and a huge amount of value being created. That value is primarily for individuals who are have obstacles of today;s world they may have taken for granted being removed, and new power to granted. But then immediately individuals use that power to make and work in communities oof all scales, from pairs through groups to nation-sized movements.“
With any luck, we now have weekly activity reports from Github to the public-swicg mailing list, as to keep everyone in the loop on the activity on ActivityPub and ActivityStreams:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Jan/0006.html
There's some sort of delay happening with the test runs of this email, but hopefully they'll show up soon. This should help increase visibility into what's happening.
"The only #Neutrality that #Aaron supported was #NetNeutrality, prioritizing those who use the Internet over those that build & serve it, a priority of constituencies strongly aligned with the #W3C's official #WebEthicalPrinciples."
RE: https://fed.brid.gy/r/https://tantek.com/2025/011/t1/remembering-aaronsw-twelve-years
Want to shape the future of the web?
I’m launching a Q&A series to help individuals and organizations understand, navigate, and contribute to the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).
What do you want to know about W3C participation?
So excited to continue participating in the W3C—shaping the future of the web through collaboration and advocacy, especially now I’m also an invited expert to the Privacy Working Group. But this work requires resources, and I need your support to continue!
Donate to my W3C Participation Project to directly support efforts to ensure web standards work for everyone.
https://opencollective.com/lolas-lab/projects/w3c-participation
Let’s build a better web together. 
#OpenWeb #WebStandards #W3C
For the first time in several years I've updated the XTXT project. Hopefully more will follow sometime soon.
https://github.com/ha1tch/xtxt/tree/main/intro
XTXT is a simple yet powerful format that addresses many challenges in modern data representation. Its ability to separate content, metadata, and structure into independent streams makes it a strong candidate for diverse applications, from hypertext systems to programming tools and cloud workflows.
CNET Japan 最新情報 総合 
in calmness 
