[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Avoding a repeat of W3C XSD - was Re: IsWeb 2.0
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 10:30 -0700, Michael Champion wrote: > > Details aside, I think that is one thing that would address some of > the problems noted here, especially Len's long-standing insistence > that "specification" and "standard" be clearly separated in people's > minds. > > Or to put it differently, "extreme specwriting" is probably going to > be a very useful way to get useful specs written, but there's also the > reality that the whole notion of a "standard" implies a waterfall > process since it is hard to refactor a standard without breaking > applications. I guess then that the W3C process could step in here? Note the emphasis on *this is a working draft*, proceed at your own peril? If the 'Extreme Spec' (XS?) isn't done in the time (but is proven to work by such as Mike Kay) then it remains a working draft with all the risk associated? I guess the other aspects mentioned (I like the Linus inner circle idea) would still hold, in spades in some cases. You need a strong lead to stop the group getting bogged down as must happen. Leaner, smaller specs could be a side effect. > XSD clearly illustrates this -- to go back and fix the > apparent mistakes would create an awful lot of havoc. Reasonable > people can disagree whether that havoc would be worthwhile to clean up > XSD 1.0, but I don't think anyone disagrees that we really want to > avoid being put in this situation again. If we had a spec, with WD plastered all over it, addressing only the top n features, implemented twice, 2 years ago, would people still react the same way? regards DaveP
|
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
|