XPointer's sleeping ???

[Michael Kay]

>At a deeper level, there is also a really tough issue at work here.
>Simply put, smaller committees can get *way* more work done than can
>larger ones...

Actually, it's the other way round. Large committees produce large
standards, and large
standards never get implemented. Small committees are good because they do
*less* work.

W3C is actually the latest in a long line of industry standards consortia
(ECMA, X/Open, OMG ...) which was set up to be small and fast, which
produced really good output in its first couple of years, and which then
gradually became big and slow. I personally don't believe secrecy will solve
this problem, because it is caused more by the tendency for the scope and
complexity of the work program to grow exponentially, than by the
decision-making process. I don't know what will solve the problem: my guess
is that W3C will eventually go the same way as the others, and yet another
new small/fast consortium will step in to take over the reins. I already
hear the initial soundings...

Mike Kay


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)