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

RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS

• From: Jim Melton <jim.melton@a...>
• To: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
• Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 10:37:27 -0600

Len,

Mike's point is that the *fast-track* process is not the same as the 
normal standards development process.  Of course, there is 
controversy in standards development, and that's often a path towards 
standards' improvement (but also a path towards uselessness just to 
reach a compromise).

But the fast-track process was explicitly designed to take 
specifications that have become standards in some other way, either 
through another (semi-) formal organization or through careful 
specification and widespread use, and turn them into ISO 
standards.  But, as Mike said, that is intended only for standards 
that are without major controversy.

The specification being discussed has been controversial -- not 
manufactured, but very real -- from the beginning.  I could go into 
the reasons for the controversy (from my viewpoint, at least), but 
that's not the point of this message.  The level of controversy 
involved is, IMHO, sufficient that the fast-track process should be 
cancelled and the specification submitted to an ISO/IEC JTC1 
Subcommittee for standardization through the normal process.  That 
might take a bit longer, but would ensure that a consensus is 
reached.  Of course, we know that's not going to happen, because the 
author of the spec under discussion would refuse any compromises or 
even to allow another (dissenting) voice to be heard.

I also agree with Mike that the USA decision (or discussion) will 
have much influence on other National Bodies' votes.

Hope this helps,
    Jim

P.S., Full disclosure: I work for Oracle Corp., which is one of the 
USA participants opposed to the USA voting "yes" on this ballot.


At 8/12/2007 08:25 AM, Len Bullard wrote:
>The problem is knowing where a controversy is genuine or manufactured.  If
>the only rule is non-controversy, very few standards would pass.   Anyone
>remember just how controversial XSD was (still is in some circles) or XML
>Namespaces?
>
>len
>
>From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@o...]
>Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 8:41 AM
>
>Thanks for providing context, Michael.  You're right: the
>commentary surrounding the INCITS balloting situation obscures
>the fact that INCITS' decision is (probably) relevant only to the
>US vote, one of many.
>
>Robin
>On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Michael Kay wrote:
>
> > I haven't seen any evidence that the US decision will influence the many
> > other national standards bodies who will also be voting. Since the whole
> > point about the fast-track process is that it's only supposed to be used
> > when things are uncontroversial, I would have thought many countries will
> > vote no purely on that basis.
> >
> > Michael Kay
> > http://www.saxonica.com/
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>
>XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
>to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
>spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
>
>[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
>Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
>subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
>List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php

========================================================================
Jim Melton --- Editor of ISO/IEC 9075-* (SQL)     Phone: +1.801.942.0144
   Co-Chair, W3C XML Query WG; F&O (etc.) editor    Fax : +1.801.942.3345
Oracle Corporation        Oracle Email: jim dot melton at oracle dot com
1930 Viscounti Drive      Standards email: jim dot melton at acm dot org
Sandy, UT 84093-1063 USA          Personal email: jim at melton dot name
========================================================================
=  Facts are facts.   But any opinions expressed are the opinions      =
=  only of myself and may or may not reflect the opinions of anybody   =
=  else with whom I may or may not have discussed the issues at hand.  =
======================================================================== 

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@a...>

• References:
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: Robin Cover <robin@o...>
  • RE: Results of Open XML balloting at INCITS
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>