> From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@allegis.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 4:37 PM
> To: 'Simon St.Laurent'; email@example.com
> Subject: RE: breaking up?
> Too bad we can't go back and start over with the benefit of hindsight.
Why can't we? SOMEBODY is going to do this SOMEDAY ... why not us, now?
You don't need a new standards body or sanctioned working group to document an XML subset (or SGML profile, if you want) that simply ignores the stuff that doesn't carry its weight. "Just say no" to defaulted attributes, ambiguous namespaces, validating with schema languges that are harder to use than to write procedural business logic, and so on. Even if implementers can't "go back and start over", users can ignore that which doesn't help them solve real problems, authors and consultants can recommend that which does work, purchases can be made on the basis of what really works, etc.
If the folks "leading the web to its full potential" via the PSVI-oriented specs turn around in a couple of years and discover that no one is following, why is that a problem for the rest of us? Conversely, if they *do* sort it all out and make it work in the real world someday, what have we lost by letting them do the bleeding on the bleeding edge?