[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: "closed groups" (was RE: Blueberry is not "closed")
It isn't consortia vs government: it is consortia and government. They have different sets of customers. This keeps the processes and outcomes in better balance by insuring that outcomes aren't pulled to only one set of interests. Preserve options including the option to abandon the W3C or ISO or any other group that doesn't meet the needs of your systems. You are not members of a fraternity; you are customers to groups that provide services. The service model is the one that preserves options. The XML Protocol group is led by people of experience who have the maturity to handle off-topic noise, who understand that there are always issues broader than the technical ones, and that in the long run, all they can offer is a solution that must be competitive with other possible solutions. Open groups are hard but they engender loyalty and consensus, but more importantly, they value the individual contributor and enable the group to keep moving when any individual drops out. The architecture group is likely to involve individuals whose reputations might suffer in open debates and because of their positions, cannot afford that risk. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Michael Brennan [mailto:Michael_Brennan@a...] This is off-topic, but it's interesting that the XML Protocol WG has broken the mold and decided to do its work in public. Anyone can subscribe to the xml-dist-app list and follow the work of the WG and even provide comments (that from what I've seen, are pretty consistently listened to and given some level of consideration). I wonder if this is an experiment never to be repeated, or a harbinger of how future work at the W3C will proceed. My employer is a member of the W3C, so if I want to find out what's being said and decided in a WG, I can manage to do so. Nonetheless, I think a more open and public process would be healthy and I applaud the XML Protocol WG for their approach (in spite of the occasional off-topic noise that inevitably ends up on the mailing list). I know that won't satisfy those who distrust private consortiums vs. government-backed standards bodies, but it could give a broader voice to those who might otherwise not practically have any avenue for contributing to the process.
|
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
|