[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: You call that a standard?

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>,"Robin Cover" <robin@i...>
• Subject: RE: You call that a standard?
• From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@S...>
• Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:21:09 -0500
• Cc: "xml-dev" <xml-dev@l...>
• Thread-index: AcQtU0vdAaucJWfEQ0+xxzib8SAEDgAAijvg
• Thread-topic: You call that a standard?

> From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) [mailto:clbullar@i...] 
> 
> We use our doubts to smother our hopes and 
> so nourish our fears.
> 
> It helps to know enough about the technology 
> to determine when a standard is useful. Copping 
> out to the permanence of change is just that. 
> Applying the term without differentiation makes 
> it meaningless.  The question is, what would be 
> meaningful to you just as I asked Dare.
> 
> Conformance testing goes a long way toward making 
> that leap from faith to provable fact.  That 
> is why test marks are a formal sign in the family 
> of trademarks.  It enables one to make IP work 
> for an industry instead of against it.
> 

You don't have to label something a standard for conformance testing to
be meaningful.  I place far more value on a spec when other people have
demonstrated that they care about it.  The more people that care and the
more they demonstrate that, the more potential value the spec has.
Otherwise, call it what you want....

• Prev by Date: RE: You call that a standard?
• Next by Date: RE: You call that a standard?
• Previous by thread: RE: You call that a standard?
• Next by thread: RE: You call that a standard?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread