xml-dev - RE: (XML is SGML, part 1,002) Re: RELAX to ISO

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

It reflects not two applications, but different sets 
of tests.  Typically the benefit is:

1.  Contractual authority - citing an ISO standard 
supports nation to nation agreements.

2.  Testability - the ISO version should have fewer 
options and direct mapping to tests that enable one 
to prove conformance

These are not negligible benefits.  They do require 
that the article be stable enough to provide coverage 
for the review period cycles (around five years but 
ISO experts should comment).  In other words, in ISO, 
documented process is a very serious concern and 
therefore administration costs are at issue.  Editors 
and companies who commit to ISO are committing to 
serious investments in ISO work.  

So, by the time the cake gets to ISO, it should be well-baked. 
If a consortium is still experimenting, don't do it.

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]


David Megginson writes:
<< other than the ability to get around certain government and industry
standardization policies.

Is that really a negligible benefit?

Without a doubt, we're going to see more government emphasis on efficiencies
such as electronic funds transfers and e-commerce nets for government
suppliers. Would it be unprecedented for there to be legislation and "sign
up" rules that mandate standards compliance? (We already have people in the
EDI community who raise objections to XML as being non-standard; i.e., not
from an approved standards body.)

Do we want to leave the door open for having to build two versions of
applications -- one for connecting to government portals, another for
non-government entities?