Re: Yo' mama's non-technical aguments
David Megginson <david@m...> wrote: | This is a bit of a creative interpretation. It's my interpretation, yes. | In fact, the original XML WG approved XML Namespaces [...] I don't know what this means. Were there WD versions that were not approved? Was WG approval by itself sufficient to move a spec anywhere along the W3C Process curve? Did the WG "approve" Namespaces before Eliot quit? | before the big reorg in Montreal -- the REC was delayed at the W3C | level, not the WG level. I don't remember when Montreal was, or what it had to do with anything, sorry. What I do remember is a provisional draft in early July being derailed by a new um, Proposal From The Director. And in my notes, I have this: Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 13:34:19 -0700 From: Jon.Bosak@e... (Jon Bosak) Message-Id: <199808032034.NAA27209@b...> To: w3c-xml-wg@w... Subject: Revised namespaces draft available A major revision of the namespaces draft is now publicly available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xml-names This draft incorporates a new attribute-based syntax for namespace declarations as well as new mechanisms for defaulting and scoping. The XML Working Group actively solicits feedback from early implementors of the revised draft and has set up a special mailing list to gather input for an editorial team that will review early implementation experiences. See the section titled "Status of this Document" near the beginning of the WD for details. Jon Bosak Chairman, W3C XML WG So, somewhere between 3 August, when Jon announced a "major revision" and 2 September when his "Declaring victory and going home" message told us all that it was really over, the XML WG "approved" Namespaces? I note that Jon's 3 Aug announcement wasn't even the last WD! Here is a WD dated 16 September (which is after the SIG closed): http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/WD-xml-names-19980916 The fact remains that while the old WG/SIG lasted, Namespaces never got beyond WD status. | you can hardly call Jon a W3C yes-man (at least not if you've ever | worked with him) -- and those of us who had issues with the W3C not | only stayed around, but in many cases, acquired more important roles | in the committees. It has nothing to do with being a yes man. It has to do with ceasing and desisting from "lying in the road", as Mike Champion describes it. It is not being a yes man to simply give up and move on. As I said, attrition. That's how W3C Process works.
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