xml-dev - RE: opposition to ISO XML?

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

Might work.  If all we are after is a 
named reference, I don't see why not.  
Again, I think we could use the strategy 
that Rick Jeliffe suggests where we 
cite SGML and the right declaration. 
It would be ALL THE OTHER XML SPECs 
such as XSLT that would then be a problem, 
but they would be anyway.  For the contracting 
issues, we are dealing lawyerSpeak, not tech.

The Web3D/ISO cooperation works fantastically.  
As in many things, it may just come down to 
the individuals.  Richard Puk and Steve Carson 
do a fantastic job and Dick is accepted as 
one of the crowd without reservation.  There 
are some who lament that VRML development 
goes too slow now, but they tend to blame 
the consortium itself and yearn for the days 
when only youngWildEyedEnthusiasts 
dominated the discussion. Oh well...  

The reality is, without a lot of volunteers, 
none of this gets done in any community.  
XML is a much bigger community but I have to 
say, I'd sooner serve as a Florida ballot counter than 
spend a day in another cheap motel in San Jose 
trying to stay awake while the headHead 
reads the meeting minutes. :-)

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

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


-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@reutershealth.com]

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....