Lists Home |
Date Index |
> In a message dated 02/05/02 21:30:25 GMT Daylight Time, email@example.com
> I don't know how to formulate this email so that it doesn't sound as
> critical or inflamatory which is not at all the intent, but the number
> of emails and threads which I am skipping on xml-dev seems to be
> exponentialy these days.
> I have enjoyed many of your contributions to discussion on this list. It
> seems to me a healthy thing that the diversity of discussion on the list
> is growing. That, at least to my mind, is an indication that XML is
> being applied in a growing range of uses and is coming to the attention
> of a more diverse group of people.
> Another factor is that simply to survive in a field that is exploding
> with new specfications we are all overtly or more subtly become
> specialists. I haven't yet decided whether to specialise in the left or
> the right angled bracket. :)
> More seriously, it is simply a reflection of how rapidly growing fields
> evolve. The first pioneers understand "everything" about the field early
> on. As the amount of knowledge explodes no one person can keep up and
> everybody finds ways to cope.
Exactly and probably no one mailing list can keep up either!
> I remember one topic that interested me a number of years back. For a
> year, maybe two, I knew everybody in the world who was working on the
> topic. Then it just became impossible to keep up. Everybody specialised.
> And that subtle, congenial pioneering feeling was, over a period of
> time, lost. It just happens that the same phenomenon is happening in and
> around XML.
Yes, and again this is an indication that there are too many paths to
continue to follow each of them at the same time rather than an
indication that we cannot continue to be pionners if we follow one of them.
> I do not want to give any judgment on the quality on these mails (this
> would be too personal and subjective) but I am primarly interested in
> core XML technologies (maybe I should call this hardcore or extreme
> Now that could be an interesting discussion. Just what are the "core"
> XML technologies. But I suspect you want something more precise, more
> technical, less philosophical.
No, there was not much hidden behind this term which is pretty much the
way the W3C speaks of XML Core working group :-) plus emerging
techniques or specifications.
That's not to say that I am not interested in anything else but I know
where to find high level discussion lists on XSLT, RDF, Topic Maps, W3C
XML Schema or whatever subject which has reached a level of maturity and
the level of quality on these lists is often not worse than what it is
on these topics on xml-dev.
> and not that much in specific applications (such as Web Services to
> one) nor phylosophical or business discussions (I have nothing against
> phylosophers nor businessmen and have even some specimens in my family
> but just don't understand them).
> Think how your life could be enriched if you did. :)
Yes, I know but I feel too old to change ;-) ...
> I am longing for a list rich of actual angle brackets, dedicated to
> technical discussions (such as the xml-dev which has given birth to SAX
> and RDDL, discussed pro and cons of schema languages or XUpdate
> syntaxes, used to help the newbies, ...).
> I wonder if you are wearing a pair of rose-tinted XML spectacles. The
> world, including the XML world is moving on. That doesn't exclude useful
> discussion on this list but with a more .... not sure of the term ...
> "corporate"? .... W3C a public mailing list seems, to me at least,
> unlikely to keep that unique feel that this list had a couple of years ago.
To me, it depends on the proportion of such emails...
> The point of this email is just to try to understand if xml-dev is such
> a list (and then the mails and theads I am skipping are more or less
> of topic) or if I need to search another place (which may eventually
> still need to be created)!
> The XML world is changing. The time of the "XML generalist" has begun to
> pass. It probably hasn't quite disappeared yet. Hopefully this list
> won't split. The diversity of inputs is fascinating, if sometimes a
> little provocative.
The diversity of the inputs on a same subject is great. I find the
diversity of the subjects more and more difficult to bear, especially on
subjects which have become mature and are discussed elsewhere. To me,
the added value of xml-dev in pretty low on these subjects.
Thanks for the kind words and for your thought, they helped me a lot to
formalize what I fell!
> If you have topics that you think need discussed then add that to the
> mix. I am sure we have things to learn from your ideas.
> Andrew Watt
See you in Barcelona.
Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com
http://xsltunit.org http://4xt.org http://examplotron.org