What Clean Specs Achieve

[Borden, Jonathan]

We should conclude that simple is good.

Efforts like the 'annotated XML spec' are a big help. In most specs a few
well chosen examples greatly add to formalisms.

Questions and controversies are bound to happen, especially with new
technology.

The proof will not be the existence of XML parsers, rather applications
which are adopted by the general public (e.g. html). specs alone can't take
us there.


> >
> >But is anyone here trying to _implement_ Java?  Lots of folks here are
> >indeed trying to _implement_ XML 1.0 (parsers and SAX), XLink
> and XPointer,
> >Namespaces, XSL, etc.  It's not like we're only trying to _use_
> them, as is
> >the case with Java (or SQL, another example that's been bounced
> around.)
>
> Most of them seem to be succeeding.  What should we conclude? -Tim
>

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net


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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)