• From: David Carver <d_a_carver@y...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 15:11:33 -0800

On 03/01/2010 03:08 PM, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>
> I guess that means we'll eventually be seeing updates of a wide 
> variety of specs that see relatively little use.  That's not all bad.  
> In the case of XLink, though, it really highlighted for me that even a 
> spec that utterly failed to build a community is still sort of somehow 
> marching along.
>
If it fits a niche for a particular segment it will survive and 
evolve.   Just because it doesn't make mass adoption to where the common 
programmer knows about it doesn't necessarily mean it isn't a success.   
All to often we evaluate the success by how wide spread it is, not by 
how well it may do its job when it's needed.

Dave

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xlink 1.1
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: xlink 1.1
    • From: David Carver <d_a_carver@y...>
  • Re: xlink 1.1
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: xlink 1.1
    • From: David Carver <d_a_carver@y...>
  • Re: xlink 1.1
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>