• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Standards and Namespaces - tangling two threads
• From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)
• Date: 31 May 2003 18:24:41 -0700
• In-reply-to: <oprpz00gitezizxn@localhost>
• References: <oprpz00gitezizxn@localhost>
• Sender: ari@l...
• User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

Mike Champion <mc@x...> writes:

> * Avoid "Big Up Front Specs" - Seek to agree only on what is minimally
> necessary for a business collaboration or technical interoperability.
> 
> * Keep it simple: When it gets ugly, re-factor.  Better to break the
> implementations of early adopters than to have the whole effort be for
> nought because nobody can understand it except the members of the
> original committee.
> 
> * Have a tight iteration cycle of specs, implementation, testing, and
> refactoring/rewriting.  If it causes more pain than gain, it fails the
> test.
> 
> 
> [speaking only for myself, needless to say]
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Which is rather unfortunate.


I would add "avoid pushing your company's products as requirements for
semi-related specs"

Ari.

• References:
  • Standards and Namespaces - tangling two threads
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Next by Date: Re: Looking for an example of a name colliision
• Previous by thread: Re: Standards and Namespaces - tangling two threads
• Next by thread: human interaction with XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread