[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Max,
> public-qt-comments is actually not a list but an address to send
> comments to the working groups about the specifications.
This in itself seems reasonable, but you are aware that those members of
the Xquery WG's that have taken part in any discussion have consistently
stated that discussion would be better on public-qt-comments so that
more WG members saw it. You can't have discussion on a one way list
that's just for sending in technical comments on specifics in the draft.
If all discussion has to happen on xml-dev or xsl-list but the majority
of working group members claim they are too busy to get feedback from
users of the language by monitoring those lists, how is progress to be
made?
The idea of a dedicated list for sending in specific errata comments for
a document is fine for a published recommendation, where you just
want a mechanism for people to send in corrections, but it doesn't work
at all well for a draft in flux, especially with a draft with as many
problems and controversies as Xpath 2.
If the designers of Xpath2 are serious about XPath2 meeting the needs of
existing Xpath users (which seems very dubious given the current Xpath2
draft) then perhaps xsl-list should be used as the comment forum, and
working group members monitor that. That way they may actually see what
are the real issues and requirements relating to existing Xpath use
are.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
|
