Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
David Megginson wrote: > > To summarize more briefly, I suggested that there are two paths to > standardization (which we all agree is a good thing): > > 1. The big-bang approach, where we try to do everything at once and > either fail or succeed spectacularly. > > 2. The incremental approach, where we do a little at a time without > getting too far ahead of implementors. I think we all agree that in standards, as in code, you must use both. Incremental when you don't understand the domain and/or don't have time for the full monty and top-down when you are confident of your understanding and your success. My question is: do we give something a label, encourage people to use it and then later invent it, or do we invent it and then encourage people to experiment with it, and THEN give it a label? The former does not strike me as "incremental". Rather, "insane." -- Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself "Chaos is the Engine" - Len Bullard 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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
