To say nothing of the time-tested idiocy of designing a spec by committee? IEEE telco protocols being the canonical example?
The whole effort seems like a terrible idea. Gruber's responses seem to me to be completely appropriate.
To say nothing of the time-tested idiocy of designing a spec by committee? IEEE telco protocols being the canonical example?
The whole effort seems like a terrible idea. Gruber's responses seem to me to be completely appropriate.
That's how things get done. People get credibility by standing up, leading, and getting things done in the way Atwood does. He didn't have the "credibility" to partner with Joel Spolsky and create Stack Overflow either but I'm glad Joel didn't see it that way.
"Say, so-and-so, you wrote a really nice book but there are several errors in the first edition. We think it's great and we love it, and we see the potential in your work, so we're going to rewrite a second edition by committee then sell it under your title and byline without your permission; that cool with you?"
To my way of thinking, Gruber comes out of this looking churlish and unhelpful at best.
The more pertinent question is why Jeff didn't make more effort to base this off one of the existing standardisation efforts.
Nevertheless, TeX might qualify as standard without commmittee.
There are others, but they did not get very far: http://kasper.phi-sci.com/tex++/ http://www.cucug.org/amiga/amiinfo/reviews/AmigaTeX.txt
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4627
[2] https://github.com/douglascrockford/JSON-js/commits/master
I don't think he'll be spearheading it by the end, for whatever thats worth.