[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jeni Tennison writes:
> Yeah, maybe you're right. I guess that my irrepressible optimism needs
> to be tempered by some realism.
People keep telling me I need some realism, so I wouldn't worry about
it.
> But that realism would also suggest
> that no matter how fine the alternative (RELAX NG is a pretty bloody
> fine alternative to W3C XML Schema), most users will be stuck, for
> whatever reason (implementation availability, because they or their
> bosses don't know any better, ...) with the latest W3C-approved specs.
That is indeed unfortunate. I fear we're stuck for the moment in a
situation where the W3C has a better reputation than its present
specifications deserve. There's a danger in the slow rate at which
people are realizing that, all the while incorporating this toxic brew
into their work.
Personally, I try to make clear to a broad group of people that the W3C
is not monolithically good - only some of their work is worth using -
and make sure they do as little damage as possible in cases where people
accept their work uncritically. I don't think there's much hope for
many of the XML-oriented projects underway, nor do I think the working
groups or the organization have any interest in hearing that. Being
friendly and cooperative seems completely inappropriate given the
present situation.
> Oh dear, I'm forgetting a little exercise that I'm supposed to do when
> I start getting concerned about this. "It's not my problem. It's not
> my problem. It's not my problem. None of this will matter in 10 years
> time."
I realized yesterday that it's about 10 years to the month since I
started working on a generic hypertext system (based on keywords in
HyperCard). The landscape looks a lot different, but the problems are
still mine, and they still matter.
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
|
