[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: standards body parallel
this is just a test to see if my posting works. sorry. (I don't think anyone's going to even see this anyway :-) Simon St.Laurent wrote: > > At 03:38 PM 10/13/00 -0400, Jonathan.Robie@S... wrote: > > > > Simon St. Laurent wrote: > > > I'm happiest to see that developers are questioning > > > the wisdom of centralized models in which the big > > > players play key roles. > > > > Small players can be extremely influential, due to the "meritocracy of > geeks" > > factor, which also holds sway in the W3C. Each Working Group has a lot of > > work to be done. If you do the work, you get listened to. I used to work for > > a very small company, Texcel, but I found that the concerns that I raised > > were listened to in the W3C. > > > > James Clark ... Henry Thompson... Tim Bray... SoftQuad... Lauren Wood... > > > > You simply don't need to work for a large company to be influential in the > > W3C. > > So why the vendor consortium approach? Why the secrecy? 'Bozo fees' just > don't seem like much of an answer. > > I'm delighted that these people (yourself included) have been able to wield > substantial influence, but does that explain the W3C's structure? > > > > > > That may just be realpolitik, of course. > > > > In fact, realpolitik is precisely what it is. > > > > If you want to create a standard for HTML or the DOM, you want Microsoft and > > Netscape to support it. If either of those parties say a decision causes > them > > significant problems, that decision will generally be addressed. If it isn't > > adopted, it isn't a standard. If the major companies don't buy into it, and > > use something different, then there is no one standard. Each company may > have > > only one vote, but each company tends to believe that adoption by the > > companies that are significant in a particular market is important. > > I think this level of realpolitik is reasonable, but again, it doesn't explain > the structure. > > Vendor consortia are by their very nature a means around antitrust laws. It > seems that it might be wise, in these days of heavier antitrust > enforcement, to > make sure that these decisions are accessible without a subpoena. > > > > > On the other hand, if *any* member of a Working Group finds that a decision > > causes them significant pain in real development efforts, that is taken very > > seriously, and that member tends to get a solution to their problem. > > My concern here lies primarily with who's in the Working Group, and whether or > not the larger world outside can hear their pain. I'm glad to hear that WGs > are responsive - I just can't figure out why the smoke-filled back room is so > critical to the process. > Simon St.Laurent > XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed. > XHTML: Migrating Toward XML > http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books
|
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
|