www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Thoughts on CJAN
Date Wed, 17 Mar 2004 14:19:19 GMT

Mark R. Diggory wrote:

> On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 14:41, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: 
>>Mark R. Diggory wrote:
>>>We should seriously consider establishing a "standards" community
>>>to establish supporting efforts such as this.
>>This list is our "standards" community.
> While trying to maintain a tone of fairness I have to state that, 
> the history of flame wars on this list really injured the productivity 
> of the project and the involvement of "all" the parties. I don't think 
> its possible to have a standard with only one party present at the table. 
> All the Apache projects interested in this spec have to stay at the table, 
> everyone has to be willing to make compromises to maintain the groups 
> cohesion. If this list is going to be a "standards community" everyone 
> needs to stay involved.

You are just validating what I said IIUC, albeit with a pessimistic view ;-)

>>>CJAN been hard at work with alot of "documentation effort". What are
>>>individuals thoughts on this project and its model?
>>That it has nothing to show, only ideas and musings. We already have 
>>working systems, and also a possible 2.0 spec that has come out of 
>>discussions here.
>>We still have to finish to implement the 1.0 spec at Apache, and IMHO 
>>this is what we should focus ATM.
> Yes, a spec is pretty much useless without actual tools that are capable of 
> applying it, and spec isn't a "standard" unless all tools agree to use 
> maintain the contracts defined within it. If any dominant tool goes renegade 
> or egotistical and begins altering the contract, then...so much for a 
> standard.

Of course. That's why I am particularly in favor of adopting right away 
the existing standard, the Maven one, and work together for the next 
level. My hope is that working to implement what there already is now, 
we will learn to work better together.

>>On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 13:20, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> However, by following a similar line of reasoning you could take for an
> analogy that IE is the predominate browser on the market, so what ever
> it defines as a DOM model or CSS implementation would be the standard,
> but yet, we all know this isn't true. 

In part it is, and Netscape and MS basically added things that later 
became standards.

I still think that getting the current standard set up at Apache is the 
first step, and then work together for the next standard. We will see 
how and if this will happen.

Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

View raw message