W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2003

Re: Precise Definition for Interoperability Needed (Was RE: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML))

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:37:49 -0600
To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Message-id: <1044999469.2333.438.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 09:22, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Yes, I read the minutes and saw that discussion 
> of appropriate use of this list.
> 
> I thought the reply being about the minutes with 
> reference to the paragraph number was sufficient. 
> I understand your admonition to start a thread 
> and excerpt from the minutes.
> 
> I am suggesting that this text as shown in the 
> minutes( 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting (why XML):  Section 3.4)
> 
> > "PC: Main reason to use XML is neutral format for interoperability 
> > [Chris] 
> > xml gives interop 
> > major reason "
> 
> requires a more formal statement. 

Hmm... the meeting record is there to record,
more or less, what people said at the meeting.

With the exception of those things denoted
RESOLVED: ..., there's no claim that everybody
agreed, nor that you should feel compelled to
speak up if you disagree.

The relevant text we're seeking consensus on
is section 3.3.1. When to use XML
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/webarch-20030206#format-specs

Suggestions for improving that text are more
interesting, at this point, than picking
up random points out of the context of the meeting.

Please direct your suggestions to Chris
in particular (with copy to www-tag) as
he has the action to do the next draft for review
of section 3 on formats.
http://www.w3.org/2003/02/06-tag-summary#archdoc-cl


Ah... I think I follow you now... the meeting
record suggests Chris is likely to include
"xml gives interop" in his next draft...

> o  the term 'interoperability' is vague and 
> has created misunderstanding in the past; a more 
> formal definition of the term is needed,
> 
> o a formal statement of the relationship of XML 
> to "interoperability" is needed if the cited text 
> remains.

OK, I trust Chris will do what he can to address those
suggestions in his next draft.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 16:38:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:16 GMT