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

RE: Avoding a repeat of W3C XSD - was Re: Is Web 2.

• To: "'davep@d...'" <davep@d...>
• Subject: RE: Avoding a repeat of W3C XSD - was Re: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:21:06 -0500
• Cc: 'Michael Champion' <michaelc.champion@g...>, XML Developers List <xml-dev@l...>

The main point, Dave, is to know a good submission when it 
shows up.  Perhaps like some forms of contracting, submissions 
should be anonymized while being sorted.  That is why Proposals 
in some businesses have to come in formal layouts, requirements 
are numbered and responses are checked by different teams.  
Then the downselect occurs and the BAFO and BARFO proceed.
There are variations such as the team that writes the requirements 
is not allowed to grade the submissions.  That means a deep bench.

In other words, if requirements are that tough to come up 
with, clarity for the product is lacking and it may not yet 
be time to create it.

len


From: Dave Pawson [mailto:davep@d...]

Not sure about W3C committees destroying hotel rooms
(Liam is that true? :-) but the 'stale' committee I'm sure
is a reality in most organisations. At least with the same faces they
know
that X will hit his hobby horse again, Y will agree if we shout 
etc. Bring new faces in and who knows what might happen. Less cosy.

Good point Len.

• Prev by Date: RE: Avoding a repeat of W3C XSD - was Re: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Next by Date: [ANN] Two Tutorials on REST - a quick intro and an expanded version
• Previous by thread: Re: Avoding a repeat of W3C XSD - was Re: IsWeb 2.0 the new XML?
• Next by thread: [ANN] Two Tutorials on REST - a quick intro and an expanded version
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread