Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Feb 10, 2006, at 20:08, Michael Champion wrote:
> At the risk of drawing flames ... arguably the EXI WG really should
> have been an XG. The (internal W3C discussion) pushback on that
> suggestion was that the research is done and now its time to
> standardize. We shall see of course.
Bah, it's been a while since mentioning EXI and consort ever drew
flame here :)
The fact is, XBC was an XG in practice and would have been one in
theory as well had the process for that been ready at the time (it
was actually requested back then, but had that been the case XBC
would be starting today). The request to do EXI as an XG was not
really pushed back on the grounds of "research having been done" or
not which is a bit too much of a subjective statement (at least in
the way it was discussed -- "I think it's not been done" / "I think
it has!" / "No!" / "Yes!" ;) but rather because XBC was EXI's XG.
--
Robin Berjon
Senior Research Scientist
Expway, http://expway.com/
|
