xml-dev - RE: RELAX to ISO

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

In order:

1.  No.  A schema is still an SGML document.  If 
you use XML, you are using SGML.  That disappoints 
the "lunatic left wing fringe" of XML but that's 
the way the documents read.

2.  The problem pointed out is duplication.  XML is 
already covered by ISO documents per the previous mail, 
so why bother.  They can cite ISO and still cover XML. 
In a situation like that, I don't know if ISO allows 
such duplication.

3.  ISO incubated SGML, not IBM.  IBM incubated GML.
Usually, ISO doesn't incubate a technology; it ratifies 
one and manages the signatory means to ensure conformance.

I'm not sure that pushing XML to ISO buys anything new 
except new editors.

Be careful what you wish for.

Len
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: Thursday, October 12, 2000 10:31 AM
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: RELAX to ISO


> In other words you are not using "XML" you are using "SGML":

Don't you think Schema and other specifications move us away from this
model?

> it is an industry profile which belongs to W3C not to ISO--we wanted to
give them
> the freedom to maintain it (and indeed, we cannot take it from them!)
> and develop it.

Why is submitting a specification to ISO "taking it away" from W3C? There
nothing that takes away the W3C's mission to incubate technology or its role
in evolving new versions of XML-related specifications.

Will we no longer see new ISO standards because technology incubators feel
something is taken away when they contribute to a standard?  (I missed it
when IBM closed its doors after having SQL and SGML "taken away" by the ISO
;-)