|
|
Re: [xml-dev] W3C Successes (RE: [xml-dev] W3C Culture and Aims )
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
In a message dated 25/04/02 15:33:27 GMT Daylight Time, michael.h.kay@ntlworld.com writes:
However, if another model had been applied in the XSL WG at the time, would we have ended up with XPath, DOM and Infoset? With a more holistic / less personality driven approach might we not have had fewer loose ends which need(ed) to be tidied?
Frankly, I think we would have had more loose ends to be tidied - unless of course, there had been a chief designer for the whole family of specs.
I don't agree with the implications of your phrase "personality driven". I think that good engineering almost always results from the vision of a good engineer.
Michael,
Good engineering is necessary but not sufficient, in my view.
Your suggestion of a "chief designer" is very much a personality-driven comment, if I may say so. :) .... I think a clear set of objectives which guided the "chief designer" would have been and would be a significant step forward.
The questions I raised on list a few days back about what W3C's aims are were, as far as I recall, left unanswered. If the W3C is to "take the Web to its full potential", surely we need answers to the questions such as:
What is "the Web"? (currently/recently a topic on TAG)
Its full potential to do what?
For whose benefit?
Without clear, insightful and explicit aims we may find that W3C has produced answers of high engineering quality to the wrong questions.
Andrew Watt
|
|
|
|
|
|