[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The lists I monitor
- From: "Simon St.Laurent" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Richard Tobin <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 15:02:52 -0400
At 07:32 PM 5/7/01 +0100, Richard Tobin wrote:
> > Maybe I'm crazy, but I monitor about 20 XML lists.
>Maybe that's reasonable for an author and journalist, but I find one
>or two plenty.
Fine for you, then. There's no magical duplication filter on lists anyway,
so I'm not sure what you're gaining.
> > Unfortunately there seems to be an attitude that W3C lists are
> > _the_ lists
>I've never heard anyone express that view. You seem to want to
>attribute it to people, but I don't think they actually hold it. I
>must admit, however, that I have formed a similar impression that you
>think anything sponsored by W3C is suspect.
I'm afraid I have heard that opinion expressed explicitly. For a public
(and rather more carefully stated than the private versions) example, see:
("loyalty and a sense of community"?)
And no, I don't consider everything sponsored by the W3C to be
suspect. Neither do I consider their results especially blessed.
> > with rare exception - like this one and XSL-List
>I don't think taking obvious counter-examples and calling them "rare
>exceptions" is very convincing.
As you appear uninterested in being convinced, I'm not especially
worried. My reading of the history doesn't appear to concur with yours.
> > RDF and
> > XLink lists both moved into the W3C, and I'm not sure that XLink has
> > benefited.
>I don't read either of those lists. What happened when they moved to
>the W3C? What went wrong? Did people stop posting to them? Were
>they harder to search or something? Why would it make any difference?
XLink suffered from a long period of quiet after an extended discussion on
xlxp-dev. The character of the list also changed, however, as
www-xml-linking-comments is more about occasional comments on specs (plus
an enormous amount of spam) rather than an open forum for discussing
issues. I'd rate this month's discussion as especially depressing.
On the RDF side, I'm happier to report that the list members, W3C folk
included, managed to nurture a much stronger sense of
community. Discussions there have been far more active and open than on
any of the other W3C lists I follow, by far. It's a really different style
- something I'd like to see more of.
> > It's not a conspiracy - it's just a shared perspective, one I don't happen
> > to share.
>I can't speak for anyone else, but I certainly don't share it... Maybe
>it only exists in your imagination?
Maybe it only exists in my experience, in public archives and private .mbx
files, and in conference conversation.
Simon St.Laurent - Associate Editor, O'Reilly & Associates
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books