xml-dev - RE: Who will maintain SAX?

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

There are at least two different services required:

1.  Record of authority maintenance - owner that can 
enforce a strict address for source of the public 
specification.  May or may not actually develop the 
specification, but ensures well-performed processes 
are in place with regards to obtaining or changing 
the record of authority.

2.  Development of the specification - any person 
or organization that can provide well-formed changes 
to the specification by a well-performed process. 

All SAX needs, it seems, is an owner willing to 
do provide the first service such that the second 
service is provided in accordance with the spirit 
of the current developers and owners.

This is a neat test case.  VRML was done this 
way and then was turned over to ISO.  ISO has 
proven to be a good owner, fair, and capable. 
The cycle time is a bit slower than one would like 
for a percolating product.  How fast do you think 
SAX will change?  Guaranteeing that the services 
in item one do not preclude the openness and access 
desired in item two seems to be the critical issue.

Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar@ingr.com
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

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


-----Original Message-----
From: KenNorth [mailto:KenNorth@email.msn.com]
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 2:54 PM
To: xml-dev
Subject: Re: Who will maintain SAX?


The problem with organizations such as Apache Software Foundation and Free
Software Foundation is they have a definite agenda.

An XML API such as SAX should be maintained by an organization that is
apolitical or agnostic when it comes to free software. It should maintain
open APIs and make the source code freely-available, but not be concerned
whether a deployment platform is commercial or not.

Isn't vendor-neutral, interoperable technology the point of specifications
such as SOAP? Shouldn't SAX be maintained in that same spirit?