• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:58:42 -0500

"Bullard, Claude L (Len)" wrote:

> I had
> some private email with one of the ISO functionaries
> who would logically be involved in such a thing and
> his comment was one of opposition to ISO rubberstamping
> W3C specifications.  He expressed that if ISO were to
> be an active partner in the development of a specification, then
> there would be a benefit to such a partnership, but that
> to merely put ISO numbers on W3C specs is a waste of time.

Sure.  The logical thing for an ISO XML would be a normative
subset/application of SGML, defined as such, that just happened
to be 100% compatible with W3C XML.  James Clark's W3C Note
(http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-sgml-xml) would be a logical base document.

Of course, there are just soooo many people in the community who
are ready, willing, and able to work on such a thing....

-- 
There is / one art                   || John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
no more / no less                    || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things                   || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness                 \\ -- Piet Hein

• References:
  • RE: opposition to ISO XML?
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Schemas: Best Practices
• Next by Date: RE: opposition to ISO XML?
• Previous by thread: RE: opposition to ISO XML?
• Next by thread: RE: opposition to ISO XML?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread