W3C and 'small vendors'.
Paul Tchistopolskii
paul at qub.com
Sun Sep 19 02:27:20 BST 1999
To whom it may concern.
I hope that this letter wuld not be considered
abstract, because it is actualy an explanation
of one particular problem and suggestion for
working that problem around.
I'm not blaming the W3C, I just want to make
things better for all of us with pointing to
some particular problem. The problem
could be solved with publishing just one
paper on W3C site.
My letter is a request for paper :
"If you have no $15K and/or you have no
ability and/or need to travel across
the world, but you want to provide
a feedback to W3C you have the
following ways to participate in the
activity of W3C: ... "
I would never write this letter months before,
because at that point I was thinking that W3C
is doing realy great and the process is
reasonable and efficient ( of course, nothing
is ideal, but I saw no critical problems).
Our ( www.renderx.com)
particular experience with W3C shows that
there *is* one ( realy, I think there is just one)
problem with W3C.
The problem is: "W3C does not care about
small vendors / independend developers, and
ignoring those groups of people usualy causes
significant problems on a long run".
Those of you who are reading XSL mailing list
may know that for last months our group
( www.renderx.com)
handled a big work in the area of XSL FO WD.
We are one of top experts in that particular area,
because we simply wrote ( at the moment )
the strongest implementation of that standard.
More. We have published the "Validating DTD"
with many comments ( because such a DTD
was a show-stopper for many people, including
ourselvs and the only feedback from WG was
"we'l include it into the next WD") ( when???).
As a result some developers wrote us that
"shame on W3C - you are doing their work".
Unfortunately, so far we got no feedback from
W3C at all. I can not count a private email :
"keep posting to the XSL-list" as a reasonable
feedback on our materials, because we have
spend days and weeks preparing our materials.
I'm not concerned too much about this particular
problem ( our DTD ). Probably, with some
hidden/political steps we may establish some
kind of relations with XSL WG. Maybe not. Does
not matter.
Also, I'm *not* saying that we have something
very special with XSL FO working group. I have
some e-mails that show that the same situation
happens with almost every group in W3C. It's
easy to understand - people are bisy with their
work, there are some ( unknown ) procedures
for making the descisions, there is a
(maybe reasonable - I don't know) 'conspiracy'
angainst the outher space e t.c.
Once again - I greatly respect W3C efforts
and the efforts of XSL WG in particular. The
April draft of XSL FOs was a *great* step.
However, it is the end of September now.
The problem is that if W3C will threat us
the way it is now - it could be easier for us
to decide at some point :
"OK, we don't care about your standard stuff. We
are the only one who have the working implementation
and we'l add our own proprietary workarounds to
the problems you are ignoring for months. Well -
maybe you are not ignoring - but with zero feedback
from you and our real clients who want our engine
right now - it would be OK for us to start with
Netscape-alike 'spacer' tags e t.c. "
Again - it is not the worstest thing. The worstest thing
is that it appears that *many* small
vendors / intependend developers are having the
same problem with W3C. I got emails
from different persons and it appears that most
of people who are 'outside the W3C' are having
the similiar problems.
For years I was thinking that damn vendors who are
introducing some proprietary extensions to some
standards are doing it because of some
political / marketing reasons.
After vain attempts to get any feedback from W3C
for months, following the procedures suggested by
W3C ( posting to the XSL-list is the suggested procedure,
right? ) now I think that I was just naive and perhaps
some marginal whoes in comp.text.xml are not actualy
stupid.
I think that if it will go as it is going now with W3C
and 'ordinary people' outside, it would cause
some vendors to start with their own 'Linux' for XML
and I don't think that it will be good.
If asking me personaly:
"whould you like to start with "Linux for XML"?"
3 months ago:
My answer would be "Of course, no. It's stupid."
If asking me about the same thing today
my answer would be:
"Can I get your e-mail / url? Just in case."
It is a sad story.
If after 3 months my answer would be:
"OK, let's start a mailing list on it, we have our
part ready, you have your part ready, we need to
hack this and that place to make it work together -
let's do it right now, it'l take us forever to understand
when they will come with the next version of WD,
because they are silent for 2 months again".
It would be the worstest possible scenario for
me and W3C, because I'l start working
*aganst* W3C, but not *for* W3C. Of course just
one small case is nothing. What I'm saying is that
the *probability* of this scenario increases every day.
More and more 'ordinary people' are gaining more
expertize in XML, more and more small companies
are coming with 'some' implementations and the last
but not the least, it appears that most of W3C
memebers realy think that keeping silence
makes things better, blaming the 'rest of the world'
with : "hey, we are doing important things - don't
bother us".
After constantly receiving such answers people
like Linus usualy say:
"OK. If you don't care about me, I'l kill you with
my implementation. It's *not* a big deal to put
together a bunch of code to get my own version
of UNIX - I don't have to be a *very*big*structure*
to make some temporary descisions, because
the task itself is *not* that complex to spend
years with designing it".
The biggest problem and maybe the the only
reason of Lunix was that a *lot* of FreeBSD
developers decided that it's not worth their
time to spend their *free* efforts to support
the group of persons who are simply ignoring
them.
I don't think that at the beginning of Linux, advicing
Linus with "Just spend $15K and join our FreeBSD
team" could work.
We should learn from Linux. We are geting closer
to the same situation. There was one letter
where the man told: "Hey! Give me one million and
I'l invent the better XML". I don' think it'l work. The more
probable scenario is:
"Hey! Just give me 5-10 teams, like renderx.com
who are frustrated with W3C - constantly rejecting
them - and we'l invent the lXML ( for free, like Linux
was created). lXML will *not* conform to W3C
specs but will *work*right*now*".
It may become possible. It's not a good thing to
ignore 'ordinary people'.
Just imagine what may happen if the army of people
who were supporting Linux would join FreeBSD
community. We could definately have the best
possible Free OS.
Unfortunately we have what we have. The
reason was:
rejecting ordinary people ( like Linus ;-)
who are outside the 'elite'
I predict that if W3C would not care about
'ordinary people' like it *is* doing now it
may result in 'Linux of XML' initiative.
The descision is up to W3C.
The approach: "become an expert and everything will
be fine with you" does not work with our group.
We *are* experts in XSL FO, but we have no time for
face-to-face meetings ( however, we spend
a *lot* of time writing down our suggestions)
and it appears that we don't want to spend
$15.000.
If W3C cares about 'ordinary people' it looks
reasonable to publish some FAQ for those people.
If W3C does not care - it may be better to be prepared
for "Linux for XML" initiative.
Maybe "Linux fo XML" would not be a bad thing.
I don't know.
For me it could be better ( and it was possible )
to have a perfect Free UNIX, if not splitting efforts
and rescources between Free BSD and Linux.
BTW - many ( if not the majority ) Linux participators
came from 'non-English' world. English spelling is not
the most important thing when it comes to applications.
It *is* when it comes to writing papers. I respect both
activities greatly.
Your mileage may vary.
Rgds.Paul.
PS. My idea was not to start a discussion, because
actualy there is nothing to discuss in my letter.
I just told about my experience with W3C. I am an example
of 'ordinary person' who has not enough time for politics,
travel e t.c. because I need to write code. Actualy, this
posting appears to be my last posting to this list,
because I need to write a *lot* of code next 2 weeks.
I came to the XML world in a hope to make things better.
I tried hardly to prepare reasonable materials
( if you'l look at the comments to our DTD, you may
understand what do I mean), instead of spending too
much time on writing abstract things in mailing lists
( even I did posted some abstract things, but most
of materials were not abstract ).
Most of things have been ignored by W3C.
However, the same things were greatly
appreciated by 'ordinary people'. Also
I had a chance to compare the efficiency
of my working group with the efficiency of
W3C working group, but it is another story.
I consider our story to be the prefect
experiment with W3C and 'ordinary person' .
The experiment took more than 4 months.
I already got some understanding and it
would help me with planning my future steps.
Now I'm providing W3C with the results of my
experiment it hope that it would be useful for W3C.
It is the only purpose of my letter.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
paul at pault.com www.renderx.com www.pault.com
XMLTube * Perl/JavaConnector * PerlApplicationServer
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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)
More information about the Xml-dev
mailing list