[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
[Recent Entries]
[Reply To This Message]
Re: Many small standards versus one, large standard?
- From: Ian Graham <ian.graham@utoronto.ca>
- To: yamahito <yamahito@gmail.com>, xml-dev@l...
- Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2016 16:59:02 -0500
Indeed, that would be more PhD-appropriate! Others might
assume I was simply ore-judging some standards documents ...
On 06-Nov-16 4:08 PM, yamahito wrote:
Assess, perhaps? :p
I see an opportunity for an interesting
"social aspects of technology" research project: asses
attributes for a large range of standards (size,
completeness, precision, domain covered, etc.), assess
the adoption success of the standard (number of
implementations, ease of interoperability, perception of
success / failure by community, etc.) and see how the two
correlate. Should at least be worth a PhD ....
On
04-Nov-16 9:36 AM, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
There are two quite
different issues?
What is the best size and
layering etc for a standard technology; and what is the
best for the standard document? (People all the time
conflate the technology with the document IMHO.)
(But you would expect the
size of the standard document would to some extent need
to reflect the size of the techology. )
But apart from that
everything will have its own rules: looking for general
principles is well and fine as long as the abstraction
doesnt then become unprovable dogma that prevents
advance.
Actually i think xml/xpath
might be quite rare in having the standards document
lead the technology, rather than being a QA on the
technology being pushed or instigated by vendors and
dictators-for-life.
I dont think it is
necessarily a bad thing if a standard has known gaps or
clear limitations or TBDs. Should ODF have been held up
until it had a spreadsheet formula language? Of course
not.
But if a formal standard
process is above all a QA on the documentation for a
technology, what it would bring to JSON is not
necessarily fixes for the edge-case problems, or the
addition of comments, even though committees love
tinkering, but we might expect it should be a clearer
list of those edgecases and short comings, and standard
ways to ameliorate them.
Regards
Rick
--
Ian Graham // <http://www.iangraham.org>
|
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
|
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
RSS 2.0 |
|
Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats,
enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.
|
Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website.
they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please
click here.
|
|