Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Do We Need James Clark to get Good Recs?
 Paul Prescod writes: >Corporate defined specs can also be awful. But the problem is that the >corporations are loathe to ignore it after they've already sold it to >their customers as the solutions to all of their problems. Individuals creating specs face a serious uphill battle in getting their proposals noticed, much less implemented. It may just be that the approaches used for creating, selling, and developing specs in corporate environments aren't, um, brutal enough to ensure a sufficiently high rate of natural selection. (Or perhaps the brutality is too much in the business side, too little in the tech.) I used to have the sense (through maybe 1997?) that the W3C was a research organization that took chances in creating specs and putting them out in the world for either success or failure. Now I get much more of the sense that W3C specs are expected to rule because of their W3C sponsorship, for better or worse, and that's a very different set of circumstances. At root, it just seems to be a problem of uneven distribution of resources - time, cash, mindshare - so ideas that start out with those advantages tend to retain those advantages. I'm hoping that RELAX NG can overcome those hurdles and demonstrate that technical excellence can still be important in a world where corporate adoption and sales pitches seem all too commonly dominant. ------------- 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 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
