[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: Edd Dumbill <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 08:51:55 -0600
That's why some people are and have always
been "sensitive" when the term "standard"
is applied to W3C specifications. The
word pollution started here in XML and if we
are now sickened by it, we have only
ourselves to slap around for that.
We don't have to be mean about it,
but those who write a lot for media
about the subject should be scrupulous
about these terms and not wave them
off as insignificant *crap*. Knowing
that someday the shoe on the other
foot may rest deeply in *crap* the bear leaves,
is a sign of savvy.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: Edd Dumbill [mailto:email@example.com]
Thank you for saying "initiatives" and not standards. I'm still reeling
with nausea from hearing things like UDDI described as "standards" last
week at XML DevCon London.
All credit to David Turner of Microsoft who showed a slide displaying
which specifications in the "web services" arena were stable, in
progress or bluesky. There was one box marked as stable. XML 1.0.