xml-dev - Re: Realistic proposals to the W3C?

["Clark C. Evans" <cce@clarkevans.com>]

This is a great start.  

On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com wrote:
> OPENNESS

The www.w3.com site acts as _the_ Buzz Word directory.

Certainly the W3C wants to "push" its own Buzz Words
to increase the visibility of its members.  However, 
as a compromise position, it should at least catalogue
similar (perhaps competing) non-W3C approaches -- SAX
and RELAX come to mind.  Of course, these would be
marked clearly as an "ADVISORY" notice, just as a
"NOTE" is clearly differentiated from a RECOMMENDATION.
 
> CLARITY OF SPECS
> 
> Insist on an open source reference implementation?

Absolutely.  Only, call me strange, but I would go 
one step further and say that the reference 
implementation *is* the recommendation and that 
any other explanatory documents are secondary.  

So, I woud not worry about the clarity of the recommendation
text.  From the reference implementation authors can compete
on the best way to describe it -- be it English or French
or Structured English or some formal language.  What ever
floats their boat.   Let's have capitalism here.

What these recommendations do is describe an automated
process.  I can't think of a better way to express this
than actual computer code.  

Best,

Clark