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

RE: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )

• To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>,"Mike Champion" <mc@x...>
• Subject: RE: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
• From: "Evan Lenz" <evan@e...>
• Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 15:07:49 -0700
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>, <jwrobie@m...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <f5by9fc7ohh.fsf@c...>

Henry Thompson wrote:
> > Hmm, the last of these was more than four years ago.  And both of
> > them resulted from the W3C's "old" role as a place where vendors can
> > come together to define interoperability profiles of reasonably
> > well-understood technologies.
>
> Um, as regards XML, you're joking, right?

The same thought comes to mind after reading your post...

>  Look at the history.  It's
> _completely_ unlike HTML, it was way out ahead of what any vendors
> were thinking about, much less trying-and-failing to interoperate.  It
> was in fact a lot like XSLT and XML Schema:  real new science was done
> in the WGs.

Are you referring to XML 1.0? I always considered it to be a good de jure
codification of de facto best practices in (i.e. most common subset of)
SGML. In that sense, Michael's characterization seems better than "real new
science", let alone a joke...

Evan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)
  • RE: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
• Next by Date: Re: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
• Previous by thread: Re: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
• Next by thread: RE: W3C Successes (RE: W3C Culture and Aims )
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread