xml-dev - RE: Who will maintain SAX?

["Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>]

At 08:56 AM 10/4/00 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>At this juncture in the history of SAX, if it 
>is turned over to another "benign dictator", then 
>the vendors who deliver the SAX products can 
>consider it a private, experimental API and 
>turn to the various consortia (which ever 
>THEY prefer) to establish a credible, funded 
>authority for maintenance of its replacement. 
>They can continue to call that SAX and ignore 
>the privately held artifact.  
>
>In fact, that will be the responsible thing 
>to do.  It's more prudent than the other 
>courses open when an individual holds authority 
>over a public specification.

So how exactly do you explain the widespread support for SAX in pretty much
every parser, even those from the 'big boys'?  I don't see them labeling
SAX as a private experimental API in their docs.

Some days I wonder if the bias toward institutions is just built into the
SGML way, or if maybe it's just my life as an independent consultant that
gives me a different perspective on the (low) value of such things.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books