[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
If it was easy, anyone would do it and could.
Some time back I made a suggestion that the
managers and programmers go to the IETF and W3C
meetings, and the marketing guys and lawyers
go to the ISO meetings. Each group gets a
member of the other to advise. That way
the right skills are applied to the right
task and the hostage gets to interpret.
And of course, working in IETF, W3C means
working with people who aren't difficult?
Pot calls kettle black. It is always a
matter of difficult people, a forest of
acronyms, and an exacting process. It
is only a difference of who owns them
and who gets to sign the documents.
... and of the authoritative relationships
among the references of each to the other.
What will be hard for the consortia to
accept is that while they are writing specifications,
the authoritative documents at the
highest level of governance are the ISO standards.
Remember, the top must talk to the bottom
and an accurate memory is everything. If
that makes the process exacting, so be it.
It will keep the system stable.
I did fight for SGML while others were
in the hallway lambasting the people
working on it, Tim. No, I am not
the best guy for the job, but I understand
the value of it. The consortium owns XML.
That was your gift to them. ISO controls
but does not own SGML. That is their gift
to the rest of us.
Last I checked, the folks working on
SGML and DSDL were pretty well qualified.
Have I missed something?
len
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Take it any way you want; killing off SGML is a death
> sentence for the freedom to develop markup according
> to what is needed over what one thinks is needed. It
> is not a matter of moving beyond roots. That we
> will do and have done. It is matter of insisting
> on coherent specifications under the aegis of
etc. It's also a matter of putting in endless hours on ISO committees,
working with with difficult people in a really exacting process, and
learning a forest of acronyms and numbers that make the W3C/IETF look
like child's-play. Volunteers, please step forward.
I'm assuming that those on the list extolling the virtues of SGML are
already fully engaged in the process of keeping it alive, and thus
speaking from experience. Right? -Tim
|
