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

Re: Clearer W3C Specs (was Re: XML Information Set is seeding impenetrab

• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@i...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 08:33:35 -0500

Thanks, Henry and Tim, for responding to my post.  I'm very happy to hear
about this advance.

Tom Passin

Henry S. Thompson  wrote:

> "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@i...> writes:
>
> > <snip/>
> >
> > The IETF won't bless an RFC until there are two independent
implementations.
> > I think this is the right kind of approach.  Surely, Tim B's Lark
> > implementation must have been a great help to the XML committee (I'm
> > guessing, I don't really know anything about its role).  There's nothing
> > like trying to build to a spec to uncover its lack of clarity.
>
> The W3C has recently introduced a status of Candidate Recommendation
> which we expect most RECs to pass through, which is specifically
> designed for implementation feedback.  XML Schema is certainly
> intending to take advantage of this.
>



xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ or CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
Unsubscribe by posting to majordom@i... the message
unsubscribe xml-dev  (or)
unsubscribe xml-dev your-subscribed-email@your-subscribed-address

Please note: New list subscriptions now closed in preparation for transfer to OASIS.

• References:
  • Clearer W3C Specs (was Re: XML Information Set is seeding impenetrable language; reconsider?)
    • From: "Michael Champion" <Mike.Champion@s...>
  • Re: Clearer W3C Specs (was Re: XML Information Set is seeding impenetrable language; reconsider?)
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@i...>
  • Re: Clearer W3C Specs (was Re: XML Information Set is seeding impenetrable language; reconsider?)
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: No Subject
• Next by Date: Re: MODERATION [was: RE: Alternatives to the W3C (was Re: Alternatives to the W3C)]
• Previous by thread: Re: Clearer W3C Specs (was Re: XML Information Set is seeding impenetrable language; reconsider?)
• Next by thread: EDITORIAL
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread