[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Realistic proposals to the W3C?
At 09:54 AM 10/17/00 +1000, James Robertson wrote: >>In fact, Tim B-L strongly prefers to have two interoperable >>implementations. It keeps the IETF people from snickering if something >>goes wrong. The problem has to do with proving interoperability. I think >>it would be healthy to see this as a formal requirement. > >I'm glad to here that _he_ "prefers" two >interoperable implementations. > >He decided not to require this in the >case of, say, XSL:FO? > >(Name _one_ full implementation of this >standard.) In fairness, XSL:FO is a Last Call working draft, albeit one for which Last Call ended 30 April 2000. http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/WD-xsl-20000327/ 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
|