[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Collected Works of SAX
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <email@example.com>
- To: David Brownell <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Leigh Dodds <email@example.com>,xml-dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 13:46:38 -0500
Although, and it may seem inconsistent on my part, if it hasn't
got a home, I'm in favor of it going to OASIS based on
the policies they use to keep things accessible. They
have some good rules about the labeling of such assets
that enable them to stay public. We had to look at this
for HumanML and the OASIS rules are as open as it is
possible for an org to be. Ask yourself how fast
SAX is changing, how and and what breadth of people
should have input, what to do when people have to
drop out, etc., then look for an org that fits those
constraints. For example, for VRML97, ISO enabled
both the ISO version and the W3DC version of the
standard, thus an ISO standard and a W3CD open version.
They are kept in parallel and that seems to satisfy
Private may conflict with open; open does not conflict
with kept in the commons. As long as one neither steals
the goose from the commons, nor the commons from the goose,
the public needs are generally met. Preserve options
but choose according to case.
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
From: David Brownell [mailto:email@example.com]
That didn't exactly get resolved the last time it came up;
there was a stall around the time Oasis got mentioned,
as I seem to recall. There's an issue that Len has been
mentioning lately: privatizing public resources. I'm not
keen on giving SAX to any consortium, myself.