Re: Thanks to XML contributors
| Our XML experience has been great. I've enjoyed the prompt and
| detailed discussions that provided guidance for the Editorial
| Review Board decisions. I've noted significant disagreements
| argued without flames. This process is so refreshingly paced that
| issues raised become issues resolved while still fresh in mind.
| Much better than the months and years spent evolving some other
| standards and SGML applications without email.
Thanks, Harvey. Lest anyone get the wrong idea, however, I must
observe that we are nowhere near done yet. We need everyone's help in
reviewing the draft spec between now and the language freeze on
November 13, and after SGML 96 we will need everyone's participation
in Phase II of this effort, which will specify hypertext mechanisms
| I believe you
| may be interested in this summary of who have been the players.
| Contributors to firstname.lastname@example.org through 1 Nov 1996
| Identifications come primarily from the Working Group and
| Editorial Review Board lists appended to the
| Extensible Markup Language (XML) W3C Working Draft 1-Nov-96
The list of WG members in the current draft is not complete, and I
think that you may be picking up some messages that were not actually
directed to the WG.
For reference purposes (given that the W3C archive for this group is
nearly unusable), I have extracted all WG traffic for the last two
months from my own mail archives and put it into the following files:
There are also gzipped versions of the same files.
I cannot guarantee that I received everything sent to the list, but
these files contain everything that I did receive. The W3C archive
for this group is publicly visible, so you are free share these with
anyone who might be interested in our discussions.