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

Re: standards body parallel

• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: Daniel.Veillard@w...
• Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:39:23 -0400

At 09:25 PM 10/13/00 +0200, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 13, 2000 at 02:45:27PM -0400, Simon St.Laurent wrote:
>  I'm usually extremely quiet but I will ask you to back up your claim
>or retire it. 

For the only public acknowledgment I've seen of such pressure, try:
http://www.xml.com/axml/notes/JeanPa.html

To be honest, I'm surprised that those comments were published, though they
weren't exactly top secret.

>I'm a W3C WG cochair and W3C employee. In a WG a
>vote is a vote is a vote. The next point is whether at the end of the day
>the spec being the result of the work is implemented, and can then go to
>REC after member vote (where again a vote is a vote is a vote). And
>considering implementation a larger firm is not likely to be a better
>candidate to provide a timely implementation to check that the spec is
>actually sound (as Jonathan pointed out previously !).

For those of us not at the table, a vote is not a vote.  While I would love
to take your statements at face value, there is no way to verify such
claims without opening the archives.  My understanding is that a vote is a
vote is a vote, except in certain rare situations.  

There are too many stories out there, especially regarding namespaces, for
me not to be skeptical.

>> That may just be realpolitik, of course.
>
>  What are you doing here except politic Simon ? You started this thread
>trying to show something, other read is in others ways, you're trying to
>minimize other people view IMHO.

I'm disagreeing with Jonathan Robie and attempting to figure out what
exactly Len Bullard is saying.  I think you may be deeply irritated that
I'm questioning your views, but I'm hardly attempting to minimize them.

>> I found it telling that a rep from Cisco, not an independent, was
suggesting
>> the W3C as a role model.
>
>  Cisco is also very engaged at IETF I don't think you can point them
>at being unaware of the various models.

I'm not saying that Cisco is unaware of the IETF.  I'm saying that I found
it telling that a large company was pushing the W3C model while others were
pushing the IETF model.

Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
XHTML: Migrating Toward XML
http://www.simonstl.com - XML essays and books

• References:
  • RE: standards body parallel
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: standards body parallel
    • From: Daniel Veillard <Daniel.Veillard@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Improved writing -- who's going to pay for it?
• Next by Date: RE: standards body parallel
• Previous by thread: Re: standards body parallel
• Next by thread: Re: standards body parallel
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread