RE: [xml-dev] Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS

["Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>]

A process is as transparent as the output, not the logic or co-occurrence
constraints that form the business rule??? Have fun.

Is this about ISO process or technical requirements?  Last I looked, this is
a Dev list, yes?

Programmers.... coders.... what say you:   Look at this as a purely
implementation task.   

For a development group, it is a decision of the development toolkit, that
is, how many patterns and representation types for an object dragged on to a
page.   For a document editor, it really isn't any different except that we
play a lot of style games with text.   OTW, HTML 1.0 + text has enough
information to keep the meaning alive.  Really.

A strategic technical decision at the point of a commercial technology
becoming a standard is what to leave out that was in the original
specification.  It is a good opportunity to cut bait.

The current document standards wars are wars over market diversity sustained
by language diversity.  The competitive interests favor differentiation but
the production costs (customer costs incurred for use of toolkits by virtue
of the relationship of language diversity to network operation costs) punish
customers.

The market must converge on the dominant document standards:  HTML, CSS,
SVG, X3D, XSLT.  You are fighting over the rights to the legacy formats.
Dump as many of them as fast as you can.  

The world doesn't speak OOXML or ODF.  It speaks HTML.  The graphics formats
are a bit up for grabs but that is a loss-leader economy.

Hold up your hand if you are someone who frowns at HTML Exports that don't
export vanilla standard (NO INSTRUCTIONS) HTML?

I dunno, Rick.  Maybe the truth is bad standards are standards for systems
either not in enough use yet or of old technology that is increasingly
irrelevant given the current frequency of the deployed builds.  

Frequency of use determines standard distribution as far as a grid is
concerned.

len


From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:rjelliffe@allette.com.au] 
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 1:52 PM

> that are without major controversy.

Where does it say that in the ISO Directives?  The consensus is the final
yes or no vote on the editor's instructions, not the excitement of
opponents to the draft.

> Of course, we know that's not going to happen, because the
> author of the spec under discussion would refuse any compromises or
> even to allow another (dissenting) voice to be heard.

But (assuming that there is a Ballot Resolution Meeting with several or
multiple nations voting "conditional yes" {No with comments}) if they
don't compromise the National Bodies won't convert from no to yes and this
process will terminate. How to they get a BRM not to have other voices,
since that is its only purpose?

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe



_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@lists.xml.org
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@lists.xml.org
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php