[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:58:42 -0500
"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:
> I had
> some private email with one of the ISO functionaries
> who would logically be involved in such a thing and
> his comment was one of opposition to ISO rubberstamping
> W3C specifications. He expressed that if ISO were to
> be an active partner in the development of a specification, then
> there would be a benefit to such a partnership, but that
> to merely put ISO numbers on W3C specs is a waste of time.
Sure. The logical thing for an ISO XML would be a normative
subset/application of SGML, defined as such, that just happened
to be 100% compatible with W3C XML. James Clark's W3C Note
(http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-sgml-xml) would be a logical base document.
Of course, there are just soooo many people in the community who
are ready, willing, and able to work on such a thing....
--
There is / one art || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness \\ -- Piet Hein
|