XML complexity, namespaces (was WG)
cbullard at hiwaay.net
Wed Mar 24 04:29:28 GMT 1999
David Megginson wrote:
> As for standards bodies, I don't know. Perhaps XML will eventually
> migrate to an Internation Standards body of some sort -- who knows if
> the W3C will even exist in five years? -- or (and this might be
> preferable) the torch will pass to a new, better-constituted body that
> takes over both the W3C and IETF standards.
I think also that trend is already in motion as evidenced by the
formal working agreements between ISO and various consortia including
the W3C and Web3D. The ISO VRML97 standard started as a consortium
standard which when mature enough and for which working implementations
could be demonstrated reliably, was forwarded to ISO for international
standardization. That is a very healthy way to do this business.
The W3C can stick closer to its charter of promoting technologies
and specifications and spend less time on *standardization*. This is
to say the W3C work is not worthy, but the focus of standardization
has legal tangles. When engineers practice law, you get poor law.
When lawyers engineer, airplanes fall out of the sky. Its a matter
of practice and focus.
The working agreements are like a wheel inside a wheel. The inner
wheels (the consortia) can turn fast. The outer wheel (ISO) turns
slower. In concert, events are notated smoothly.
XML won't supplant SGML. It won't have to. The same people I met
building SGML are building XML. The community matters. The specs
and standards are what we implement and agree on. Nothing more.
I miss Yuri. He understood that.
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;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)
More information about the Xml-dev