Lists Home |
Date Index |
1/9/2002 3:09:17 AM, "Michael Rys" <email@example.com> wrote:
>I am a bit surprised that people then did not complain.
Having been on your position in the past, I sympathize, but
that is the way the world works. I think there's two
things to keep in mind:
- Most software types don't take the trouble to figure out what W3C
spec-ese means for their own lives unless they are strongly motivated.
Witness the patent policy debacle; there were no comments
on the working draft until the Slashdot people heard the *implications*
of the "RAND licensing model" for themselves. Then all hell broke loose.
Just be glad that nobody is rousing the rabble on Slashdot against you.<grin>
Somewhat more seriously, if working groups want comments on
anything before it's time to think about implementation, they need to
beat the bushes ... here, maybe a W3C press release, maybe even
- Lots of people simply trust the W3C to do right by them. If the
W3C says it's developing a query language for XML that has many
of the capabilities SQL has for the relational model, then
many simply assume that it has insert/delete/update semantics.
You wouldn't be happy if you ordered a car and found out that it
didn't come with a heater and the windows don't roll down and
the trunk doesn't have a lock ... only to be told by the dealer that
the contract never said anything about that stuff.