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

RE: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )

• To: 'Alaric Snell' <alaric@a...>, Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>, 'Murali Mani' <mani@C...>, "'xml-dev@l...'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• From: Matthew Gertner <matthew.gertner@s...>
• Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 15:03:32 +0200

Alaric,

What a beautifully understated website! :-) Seriously, your idea for the
technical approach for the discussion forums with the option to publish
documents sounds perfect. I'm not sure whether the idea of Open Research is
compatible with Open Standards. Would you want to combine these two on the
same site? If so, we need to agree that they are compatible goals (I could
be convinced no doubt). If not, then I would accept the URL unhesitatingly,
at least as an interim step. 

Could we use the mailing list? I noticed there hasn't been that much
actively lately besides some spam. This would be useful since I guarantee
that someone will complain within the next 48 hours about this list being
used to discuss subversive efforts only tangentially related to XML. (Of
course, we can use eGroups or whatever as well.)

Also, how much (if any) of the discussion forum technology has already been
developed? Is it from some standard source or custom developed?

Matt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alaric Snell [mailto:alaric@a...]
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:42 PM
> To: Matthew Gertner; 'Murali Mani'; 'xml-dev@l...'
> Subject: Re:  frustration (was RE:  XPath 2.0 )
> 
> 
> On Monday 13 May 2002 11:25, Matthew Gertner wrote:
> 
> > In pursuing the open source parallel, I would suggest that 
> a website be set
> > up where individuals or small groups can submit proposals for
> > specifications. These would then be opened to discussion on 
> a mailing list.
> > When consensus is reached, they would be published formally 
> as "Authorized
> > Specifications" or whatever.
> 
> I had an idea for this about a year ago:
> 
> http://www.open-research.org.uk/
> 
>  - it's a splash page!
> 
> But I've not had time to finish it.
> 
> The idea is to have a tree structure of discussion forums - 
> like Usenet - and 
> indeed hopefully accessible as a news server 
> (news.open-research.org.uk?) 
> since I hate web forums.
> 
> Those forums, however, have special messages you can send 
> that propose 
> documents and let people vote on them. You can also do 
> general votes just to 
> gather opinions.
> 
> Documents that get voted in are enshrined in a database and 
> assigned a number 
> and everything!
> 
> > I'm very serious about this. This discussion has been going 
> on for a long
> > time (I published a "rant" about this over two years ago --
> > http://www.schemantix.com/resources/rants/rants_2.html), 
> but it is now time
> > for action. I am personally willing to devote time and 
> resources to setting
> > this up. Is anyone else?
> 
> If you like the idea of Open Research - designed to be an open source 
> standards body in its own right for more than just XML - then 
> I'll gladly 
> donate the .uk domains and the capacity on my server I set 
> aside for it all!
> 
> >
> > Matt
> >
> 
> ABS
> 
> -- 
>                                Alaric B. Snell
>  http://www.alaric-snell.com/  http://RFC.net/  
> http://www.warhead.org.uk/
>    Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software  
> 

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: Re: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Previous by thread: Re: organization (was RE: frustration)
• Next by thread: Re: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread