Lists Home |
Date Index |
>If people spent as much times giving feedback to W3C working groups as
>they spent angrily and impotently railing on XML-DEV maybe some
>would be made.
See the problem here is I'm na´ve, I just naturally assume that the
different W3C working groups have at least as much awareness as I have
about community argumentation in their various areas of concern.
I did voice some complaints a propos xpath 2.0 but only once, why keep
ranting? Perhaps there should be some "No Xquery, XSDL integration with
Xpath 2.0" petition passed around, worked once before with the no
xsl:script petition; of course I think a lot of people would like to see
some sort of integration, just not as much as is being suggested, this
is the problem where the community of users might split at the such a
petition; I would rather sign it than risk losing what I think works
pretty O.K and I am not known as being a terribly risk aversive type.
How about this then for the petition:
"We don't want Xpath 2.0 to be strongly typed."
That should actually do it cause it botches the model of how it's
supposed to be the basis for Xquery.
As an aside doesn't it seem like more and more coming from W3C is going
down the strong typing path? Of course this is cause of integration with
XSDL right? Seems weird somehow, what with there being some unresolved
arguments as to which are more productive, strongly typed or weakly
OHMYGOSH Is this a backdoor coup by the strong typers!!!
Perhaps we would be best served by not having either strong typing or
weak typing forced on us, thus allowing me to choose weak typing like I
I don't know about the average user not having enough time to track and
read specs, I consider myself an average user and I have time. I think
that us average users have a trust problem with W3C, much as I suppose
the average citizen has a trust problem with politicians. I feel a
notable apathy, perhaps this is wrong but it is particularly difficult
to will oneself different.