• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• To: Tyler Baker <tyler@i...>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 13:58:12 -0800

At 04:42 PM 1/14/99 -0500, Tyler Baker wrote:
>The W3C Namespaces WG could of done a much better job if they tried harder and
>did not fall into the groupthink model that appears to have driven this draft
>from the beginning.

Well, namespaces may be a horrible terrible thing as Tyler says, but I
can assure everyone that they are not a result of group-think.  I'm 
no standards veteran, but I can tell you that the process of designing
the namespace spec was the longest, toughest, most contentious, most
complex work ever done in the sphere of the XML activity.  If I told
you how many person-months were burned up in producing this puppy, you
wouldn't believe me.

Not a surprise.  Phil Karlton, one of the smartest programmers I ever
met, said "there are only two hard problems in Computer Science:
cache invalidation and naming things".  If anyone ever proposes
XML-based cache invalidation, watch me run the other way. -T.

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Prev by Date: Microsoft XML chat tomorrow
• Next by Date: Exploring Allaire's WDDX..
• Previous by thread: Re: Big Day for Namespaces, Styles
• Next by thread: XSchema suggestion/wish: Parameter entity (or SGML DTD inclusions/exclusions?) "equivalent"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread