[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Rob McDougall <RMcDouga@JetForm.com>
- To: XML Dev <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 16:55:03 -0400
The original topic seemed to be based more on questioning why the current
draft spec is the way it is rather than questioning what the W3C is
currently doing.
My take on the problem is that I think the W3C could make public some of the
twisted paths the namespace specification took to get to its final
destination. IMO, this is typically where the majority of concerns tend to
arise ("did you examine all the alternatives?", "why was this alternative
rejected?"). I would like to see all the W3C committees be required to
produce an annotated spec (similar to Tim's excellent annotated XML spec)
rather than just a flat specification. This will allow newcomers to the
process to feel more confidence that the committee has examined all the
alternatives and understand why certain alternatives were chosen over
others.
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 1998 7:43 AM
To: XML Dev
Subject: W3C and the public (was Namespaces Revisited...)
One area in which the W3C could do a lot to improve its openness and
therefore its process is by paying attention to the public portions of its
site. The w3.org/XML page doesn't even _list_ the latest namespaces draft;
the 'highlights' at the top is all past and gone. The last modified date
at the bottom is 9/11/98 - maybe someone fixed a typo.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
