RE: Why 90 percent of XML standards will fail

[Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>]

At 12:37 PM -0500 2/27/01, Frank Richards wrote:
>I agree with your point, but find disingenuous a little strong. If nothing
>else there's a nice ring to the hierarchy:
>
>The ISO and it's ilk, blessed by law and treaty come up with legalistic (and
>legal) 'standards'.
>
>The corporations of the w3c come up with (hopefully) comprehensive, well
>defined, but 'make it work' oriented 'recommendations'.
>
>And the IETF, open to anyone who will work, generates 'Requests for comment'
>by 'rough consensus and running code.'
>

But the IETF does produce standards. Not all RFCs become IETF 
standards, but some do. See http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/std-index.html 
for the current list of about 60 different IETF standards, including 
some very important ones like IP, TCP, and UDP.
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
|                  The XML Bible (IDG Books, 1999)                   |
|              http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/books/bible/               |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764532367/cafeaulaitA/   |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://metalab.unc.edu/javafaq/ |
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://metalab.unc.edu/xml/     |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+