xml-dev - RE: power uses of XML vs. simple uses of XML

["Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>]

We are not creating standards.  We 
are commenting on a W3C work.  The W3C is 
creating specifications.  Specifications 
may be for systems which do not exist.  Standards 
are typically for systems which do exist.

If XML Schema works and contains no technical 
flaws, then there is no reason to keep it  
from being implemented.  If they contain flaws 
that cannot be discovered except by implementation 
then the risk of fielding is high and the specification 
should be withheld.  If it is only 
the obscurity of the writing, that can be fixed 
without holding up the specification.  If the 
writing is obscuring technical flaws, then the 
specification should be withheld.

If they set anything in stone for too long, 
they are dead on arrival.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: James Robertson [mailto:jamesr@steptwo.com.au]


I fully support the concept of "pure research". Absolutely
invaluable, if we are to meet future, unknown, requirements.

But that is not what we are doing here.

We are creating _standards_.

They do not innovate, they set in stone the best concepts
that have been invented so far, so everyone can
talk the same language.

But, to my mind, we are now well into uncharted
territory. Why then are we still creating standards?

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************