[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ken is right. Common experience with CALS taught me and
possibly Ken to be a little choosy about the policy and
guidance aspects while the technology is churning. A procurement
official can usually waiver this stuff, but when it shows
up in some documents, it can become a mandatory.
I am looking at such an RFP right now. We and
ALL of the major players in our market are no-bidding
it; yet, the procurement official's bosses are saying,
"We don't care. Push on." One has to wonder what
will happen on that one given they are in a state that
just recalled their governor and replaced him with a
movie action star over budget concerns. The choice
of build in build-or-buy given technologies under a
rapid rate of change is tres risky. Careers are known
to evaporate if it doesn't work and that is why one
has to be really choosy with guidance documents.
len
From: Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
<Quote1>
While true, my understanding is that non-technical influences impacted
on the decision to use W3C Schema and not even regard available
technologies such as RELAX-NG as viable candidates.
</Quote1>
As I was not involved in the creation of the Navy XML Developer's Guide
(which is where I believe the section in question came from without
adjustment), I unfortunately cannot speak to that. In terms of
timeframes, it's possible that the version of the Navy XML Developer's
Guide that was used as a source was created before the RELAX NG OASIS TC
was started. Again, I was not involved in any way in making that
decision or any other one that you reference below - I simply
"federalized" the document and made some minor adjustments per requests
from various folks.
You could always provide feedback to the Department of Navy XML folks on
their XML Developer's Guide [1] if you'd like.
Kind Regards,
Joe Chiusano
Booz | Allen | Hamilton
[1]
http://www.doncio.navy.mil/(yqh35d45ct0vbl45h4vrjey1)/ContentView.aspx?ID=37
4
"G. Ken Holman" wrote:
> Regardless, it gets *treated* as policy (and they should have realized
> that, much of what the government calls guidance gets treated de facto as
> policy) and the ripple effect has been felt far and wide by such guidance
> not to consider alternatives.
|
