[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] what's wrong with CC/PP
As long as we're talking about controversial design choices... The latest draft of Composite Capabilities/Preference Profiles (CC/PP) has me really wondering. (http://www.w3.org/TR/CCPP-ra) CC/PP is a critical part of making XHTML and other XML vocabularies easily exchangeable, allowing clients, servers, and other participants to describe their capabilities. Over a year since RDF Schemas went into Proposed Recommendation status, apparently never to return, this critical spec-in-progress announces that it plans to define its vocabulary items in RDF Schemas. RDF Schema isn't the only W3C spec referenced here - P3P, digital signatures and XML all pop up, along with WAI, and of course HTTP - but it seems like this is some really critical work to be building on foundations that aren't nearly stable (or, from some perspectives, even likable) yet. WAP and the IETF CONNEG work are also referenced. The "Executive Summary of Requirements" notes "Flexibility, extensibility, and distribution," but appears to have entirely forgotten simplicity. Yikes! Is it too late to derail this train? Simon St.Laurent XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. Building XML Applications Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth http://www.simonstl.com *************************************************************************** This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers. To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ ***************************************************************************
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|