OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

That is the sort of thing that make some take 
the W3C a little less seriously as a 'standards 

1.  There is seldom if ever a reason for a public 
standard to be secret information, nor any of the 
information which has acted in a policy role with 
regard to its acceptance.   There is if this is 
actually a private specification for a system whose 
design is shared among the members of that private 
organization.  This is the difference in a commons 
and private property.  The former enables cooperation; 
the latter enables competition.

2.  Policies for the creation of dissemination of 
the work products must be the same for all groups 
that create standards under the aegis of a standards 
organization with some limited flexibility accorded 
to the chairs of the groups creating those.  A private 
organization has no such constraints but to mitigate 
conflicts within that organization will evolve some 
means of mitigation such as deferring to the authority 
of a single group or individual within that organization. 
The effectiveness of that will be limited by the 
competence of that agent and the means accorded to that agent.

It is often said that the differences among these 
organizations is not perceptible or that one 
could not judge given the products.  There is a 
difference between temporal competence and 
inbuilt limitations based on organizational 
requirements.  Caveat emptor.  Individuals will 
make a difference in a short run, but over the 
long haul, institutional policies are more reliable. 

One can tweak a Volkswagen to run like a Masserati. 
It just won't run very long.


From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]

At 10:42 AM 6/20/2003 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>Are the W3C implementations *reference* implementations
>or *sample* implementations?  IOW, how is the implementation
>tied to the specification in terms of features and proof
>of conforming and compliant implementation?  Are any public source?
>Are they tied normatively to the spec or informatively?

This information is not public, certainly not a spec-by-spec basis.

 From what I can gather, different Working Groups appear to have very 
different criteria, but few of them take the time to explain the criteria, 
at least in public.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS