[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Tatu Saloranta said:
> --- Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@allette.com.au> wrote:
>
>> That is why, ultimately, the current XML efficiency
>> problem is not with
>> technology: not APIs, algorithms, CPU instruction
>> sets. The XML
>> efficiency problem is with motivating researchers
>> and open source
>> developers into areas that match corporate business
>> requirements.
>
> With all due respect, this is undermining existing
> efforts that do try to address various problems.
Oh, if I cared much about respect I never would open my mouth :-)
Obviously the proximate cause of technical advancement is people
developing things. But the ultimate cause is people being motivated
to develop things. In the case of open source, a company can motivate
things by funding an open source front, such as Apache, or by allowing its
engineers time to work on open source efforts, such as Google more or
less,
or by donating to a mission critical effort, for example to Michael Kay;
but prizes are a *very* traditional approach to rewarding community effort
without having the cost of funding each particular effort.
I am really happy to hear Robin B's anouncement of the XML competition. It
would be much more effective if some stakeholder could back this up with a
cash incentive, and piggyback the kind of competition I am speaking of.
Otherwise you get the situation of binary XML projects which are developed
with VC funding or by larger companies competing against XML parsers which
are largely developed by open source developers or by developers whose
main interest is in architecting a solution that can fit in with XML
Schemas, rather than raw performance per se.
Cheers
Rick
a very traditional form of encouragement
|
