• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:11:31 -0400
• In-reply-to: <013601c26963$82137ff0$0400a8c0@gandalf>

Aaron writes:
> At risk of being called naïve once again, this seems very
> counterproductive if the ultimate goal is widespread interoperability.

"Widespread interoperability" is very different from "enough interop and
features to let us sell things" that appears to be the goal of a large
share of the W3C membership.

XML 1.0 demonstrated that it is in fact quite possible to enhance
interoperability by doing much less, a lesson that appears to have gone
completely over the head of the W3C.

> If the energy and criticism poured daily into this list were directed
> towards the WGs as Jenni suggests, I wonder how things might be
> different. 

Based on my experience, I don't believe they would be different.


-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

• References:
  • RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Ann: Guide to the XML Schema Specifications
• Next by Date: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Previous by thread: RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by thread: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread