xml-dev - RE: Who will maintain SAX?

[Bill dehOra <wdehora@cromwellmedia.co.uk>]

>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. 

I don't know. Is there widespread outrage currently that SAX is not inside a
formal body? 

 
>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.
        
It's a public specification, not a public specification. That is, it's in
the public domain, not public property. Handing it overe to a new maintainer
isn't exactly co-opting it.

SAX is the success story of XML processing. Hands down. What is it about the
way SAX is developed that needs to be fixed, other than finding a new
maintainer? And more importantly why does it have no competition despite not
being a ratified standard?


-Bill de hÓra