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

RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?

• To: 'Michael Kay' <mike@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <len.bullard@i...>
• Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:01:40 -0500

By participating in some n of successful and 
failed standards efforts in a knowledge domain 
in which they are competent.  A professional 
team should not be composed entirely of standards 
professionals.   It would be interesting to 
hear Jon Bosak's thoughts on his choices for 
the XML team because I'd say that most teams 
I've seen succeed did so because a leader 
selected them rather than self-nomination. 
While the XML team was two layered (a group 
of main singers and a chorus), decisions stayed 
in the main.  Goldfarb told me once that this 
was a good organizational style as long as 
the team leader had a plan to begin with.

The MPEG/MHEG group comes to mind.

Again, I see standards and specifications as 
two different animals differentiated initially 
by the pre-existence of an established market. 
That sets constraints which make the politics 
more manageable.

If I had to boil out one phrase from the 
position of an observer to describe the 
problem of XML Schema, it would be mission creep. 

OTOH, XSD is not a failure; just a bit of a 
monster.  It is similar to SGML in that perception: 
workable but overwrought.  It took SGML some time 
to get to that state if you count the evolution 
of it's predecessors.  So, perhaps a second issue 
that bedevils these efforts is the pervasive and 
wrong-headed concept of Internet Time, or at least, 
the interpretation that very large fast scaling 
systems require rapid adaptation.  In fact, it 
can be the case that this is precisely when one 
wants to slow down.

len


From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@s...]
 
>There are more failures from the self-constituted groups of amateur 
>standards writers than there are successes.  You are going to quote back 
>to me the few notable successes from the amateurs but they are fewer 
>than their counterparts.  Don't confuse myth for math.

How does a standards writer acquire professional standing, please?

And can you give an example of a group that is not self-constituted?

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/



-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/index.php>

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Next by Date: RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Previous by thread: Re: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Next by thread: RE: Is Web 2.0 the new XML?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread