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

[Matt Sergeant <matt@sergeant.org>]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Clark C. Evans wrote:

>   "Thus, it is the acceptance test suite which is
>    really the authorative design document".

Test suites I can go with for testing implementations. Its how Ken MacLeod
and co did the Perl SAX2 bindings, for example, and it works really
well. But they are implementation dependant.

Of course I don't personally believe that the current specs are all that
broken, apart from size-wise. XSLT was just pushing the perimiter
IMHO. XSL FO is way beyond the limit, for example. But we've already
spoken of breaking things up into modular sections, so thats a good
start. I suggest that we could talk ourselves in circles here, and we
should look towards small changes and see what difference they
make. Totally transforming the way specs are written is just too big a
change IMHO. Of course I agree with Simon that the W3C needs to open its
doors a bit. And that is a small change that they should have done over a
year ago when we first started talking about it here. *sigh*

-- 
<Matt/>

    /||    ** Director and CTO **
   //||    **  AxKit.com Ltd   **  ** XML Application Serving **
  // ||    ** http://axkit.org **  ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP  **
 // \\| // **     Personal Web Site: http://sergeant.org/     **
     \\//
     //\\
    //  \\