• To: 'Danny Ayers' <danny666@v...>, uche.ogbuji@f...
• Subject: RE: "In hot summer have I great rejoicing/When the tempests kill the earth's foul peace"
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 10:01:35 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

That's easy.

1.  XML 1.0 is core.  Touch this at your own risk but don't try 
to manage that risk by sharing it.  

2. Everything else labeled "XML" is an XML application language or an 
XML system (an implementation).  Build these to your heart's 
content and share them as widely as you find willing hearts. 
You can aggregate these into a framework/infratstructure but 
that is productization, not standardization.

3.  Calling something a standard as a means to sell it before 
it has been successfully fielded admits to a weak definition.  
It becomes a standard after it is sold successfully.

4.  Specifying a technology publicly to get buy-in to the 
follow-on implementations is one means to manage the risk 
of it becoming a premature standard.

5.  XML Doesn't Care.  So you have to.

We still use CSV for most portable data.  We don't confuse 
portable data concepts with interoperable systems concepts. 
But you can't do CSV without a data format either.  Names, 
widths, and types are still negotiable either side of the file.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny666@v...]

The XML community shouldn't go out of its way to be accomodating? If it was
clear where the line around the community were drawn then this might make
more sense. 

• Prev by Date: Re: XQuery and DTD/Schema?
• Next by Date: When to create a standard (was XQuery and DTD/Schema?)
• Previous by thread: RE: "In hot summer have I great rejoicing/When the tempestskill the earth's foul peace"
• Next by thread: Still Time to Submit Abstract and Speak at Extreme 2002 Montreal
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread