RE: is that a fork in the road?

[Michael Fitzgerald <mike@wyeast.net>]

Nicely said.

When a small contingent decides for of a larger contingent, the larger
contingent does not readily accept the decision, esp. when delivered
condescendingly. A Bloody Sunday (Jan. 9, 1905) eventually yields a
Bolshevik revolution which eventually yields a Perestroika which eventually
yields a...

Buy-in is very important. Grassroots efforts seem to get buy-in easier than
top-down efforts, but everyone knows that, right? Right?

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com
[mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 3:18 PM
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: is that a fork in the road?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@ingr.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 5:25 PM
> To: Simon St.Laurent; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: is that a fork in the road?
>
>
>
> So I am really missing your point.  Change seems
> inevitable.  Will it be ad hoc or planned?

I'm trying to think of successful examples of "planned" change.  I can think
of all sorts of plans that went nowhere commercially viable and were blown
away by "ad hoc" innovations ... X/Open, OSI Networking, Ada, DSSSL/HyTime
... the Soviet economy.  Someone please offer counter-examples to undermine
the hypothesis that "planned change" mainly tidies up ad hoc innovation,
then gets over-ambitious, bloats up, and ultimately rots.