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

Re: XML Namespaces 1.1

• From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
• To: "Rick Yorgason" <rick@firefang.com>
• Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 20:27:56 +0100

Original Message From: "Rick Yorgason"
> On 25/05/2011 4:28 AM, Pete Cordell wrote:
>> So that makes me think, in the IETF they have Experimental RFCs, which
>> are proposals whose impact on the net are not obvious. Maybe the W3C
>> should do something similar. The implications of an Experimental
>> Recomendation would be "We understand that people are interested in
>> doing something in this area, and if you want to do something then we
>> suggest doing this. But you do so at your own risk."
>
> Actually, if the W3C won't do it, I suppose you could try to submit your 
> proposals to the IETF.  I wonder how much resistance there would be to 
> such a thing...

The W3C and the IETF had quite a bit of discussion about who should develop 
HTTP many years back so they probably got quite a fixed idea about who owns 
what turf!

Pete Cordell
Codalogic Ltd
Interface XML to C++ the easy way using C++ XML
data binding to convert XSD schemas to C++ classes.
Visit http://codalogic.com/lmx/ or http://www.xml2cpp.com
for more info
Twitter: http://twitter.com/petecordell

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>

• References:
  • XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@firefang.com>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: "Pete Cordell" <petexmldev@codalogic.com>
  • Re: XML Namespaces 1.1
    • From: Rick Yorgason <rick@firefang.com>