• From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
• To: "'Robin Cover'" <robin@o...>, "'Michael Kay'" <mike@s...>
• Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 09:25:07 -0500

The problem is knowing where a controversy is genuine or manufactured.  If
the only rule is non-controversy, very few standards would pass.   Anyone
remember just how controversial XSD was (still is in some circles) or XML
Namespaces?  

len

From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@o...] 
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 8:41 AM
 
Thanks for providing context, Michael.  You're right: the
commentary surrounding the INCITS balloting situation obscures
the fact that INCITS' decision is (probably) relevant only to the
US vote, one of many.

Robin
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Michael Kay wrote:

> I haven't seen any evidence that the US decision will influence the many
> other national standards bodies who will also be voting. Since the whole
> point about the fast-track process is that it's only supposed to be used
> when things are uncontroversial, I would have thought many countries will
> vote no purely on that basis.
>
> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: Jim Melton <jim.melton@a...>
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>

• References:
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: Robin Cover <robin@o...>