xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane_Curc...@lotus.com
Subject Re: xml.apache.org charter proposal - to Ted/Arved comments
Date Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:10:00 GMT
I'd like to see us support good standards for various reasons, but also
allow other, more experimental projects. -sc Comments below

---- you "Arved Sandstrom" <Arved_37@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote----
> Some possible standards bodies would include W3C, IETF, OASIS, ISO....
> Not just W3C.
-- I <shane_curcuru@lotus.com write --
+1  We should consider any major and widely-accepted standards body that
works in our space. -sc

---- you "Arved Sandstrom" <Arved_37@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote----
> I don't think we want to rule out experimental projects, though. For
> example, if we stuck with "standards" then we'd only support XML Schema,
and
> if someone approached us with the equivalent of RELAX or TREX, what would
we
> say? Go away, you don't have the blessings of W3C? I mean, I truly hope
we
...
> are not going to be just an implementations shop for W3C. I think there
are
> a bunch of XML problems out there that W3C doesn't have the best solution
> for, or even any solution for. Let me put it this way - who came up with
> SAX? And look at the other major XML parsing API that W3C came up with
> (which I truly dislike...)
-- I <shane_curcuru@lotus.com write --
I also agree: we should support both standards-based work and experimental
work, whether it's likely to become a future standard or it's just a really
good idea that fits nicely in our space.


---- you "Ted Leung" <twleung@sauria.com> wrote ----
> I fully agree with you, Arved.  I do not believe that we should be just
the
> code-body
> shop for W3C -- or any other "standards" body.   I also agree that it is
> necessary to
> have a place for experimental projects in order to keep the XML project
> vital.  Innovation
> comes from the bottom up.  The fish, on the other hand, rots from the
head.

---- you "Arved Sandstrom" <Arved_37@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote----
> I think "standards-based" is maybe a bit too constrictive, is my point
> Let's accept projects as they show up, on a case-by-case basis, if they
> propose to solve a real problem and it looks like they will do it well.
This
> covers standards, anyway - the whole point of having a standard
(presumably)
> is because it helps define a problem space and its solution.
-- I <shane_curcuru@lotus.com write --
One additional point: I think it's important to provide implementations of
standards because that can help businesses get out of vendor
locked-applications.  I'd like to see us encourage useful standards by
providing good implementations so that users will then have a viable
standards-based choice for their applications.  Hopefully ours will be the
best all-around implementations, but if not, then users will have a choice.

I also think we should allow various experimental projects and ideas to
flourish as well: innovation is a good thing, and having nifty neat new
ideas is one of the things that will keep attracting new developers to
Apache projects. -sc

---- you "Ted Leung" <twleung@sauria.com> wrote ----
> I like this idea, but how do we make sure that we are dealing
even-handedly
> with
> all projects that show up.  The ASF imprimatur is highly desirable.
That's
> how
> we got major politicking between Sun and IBM, and why we have 2 XML
> codebases
> that are the ASF XML Parser, depending on whose marketing folks you are
> talking
> to.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail:     webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail:          general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message