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

Re: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)

• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 11:06:59 -0400

On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 09:44, Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer wrote:
> Now is the time to take it apart.
> 
> I don't want to sit on this list later and have 
> people tell me that they always knew it and of course 
> the W3C did the same "mistakes" again...

Wow!  I can't say I've ever felt that invited to take a cold hard look
at any W3C spec in development.  And you actually sound _interested_ in
hardball criticism.

That's at least a dramatic change in tone, and I'll take you up on it.
(Must find time to read spec, hopefully this weekend)  

A few questions:
1. You note "on this list" for the discussion - should www-forms be
cross-posted, or some such?

2. Don Park brought up the patents issue, and I can't say I'm especially
enthusiastic about the prospect of working on specs I'd have to pay a
fee to implement. (I share David Brownell's concern about the difference
between "sero cost" and "royalty free" and won't touch RAND, period.) Is
there anything that can be said on this matter?

3. You might want to make a similar offer on XHTML-L@y.... 
You'll get a very different perspective from that crowd (if they take
you up on it), but it might be helpful.

-- 
Simon St.Laurent
"Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." - Emile Coue

• References:
  • Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
    • From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <schnitz@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RAND issues
• Next by Date: RE: RAND issues
• Previous by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Next by thread: RE: Let's get real on W3C XForms 1.0 (why it stinks, today)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread