xml-dev - RE: sunshine and standards development

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

Title: RE: sunshine and standards development

Yes.  What Ken North originally asked is if taking XML to

the standards ecology is a good idea to enable contract-based

work which requires citing a standard from a credible standards

organization is a good idea.   It is.  The issue might be one

of expectations.  I would expect it to be better written, austere,

but change nothing in terms of the technology.  In the case of

XML, as has been explained, this is already the case.  You

might have to accept that you would be citing an SGML profile. 

I don't know why that would be a problem other than overcoming

the misinformation currently circulating about SGML profiles.

Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]

 I guess by that definition the W3C is not a "standards organization", never was, never will be. I think you would be more successful looking to the ISO for "real standards" than trying to persuade the W3C of the error of its ways. 

My basic conclusion from reading these threads for the last week or so is that there is room in the XML community for wide-open collaboration to incubate technologies (IETF or OASIS TC's ???), less open collaboration on how to compete in the technology space without imposing undue misery on the industry (the W3C?), and a formal process for creating carved-in-stone standards (ISO?).  Each of these occupies a useful niche in the ecology of the Internet, it's a waste of time to try to get one organization to do it all or to force any organization to live by the rules of a different niche.