Methinks that planning for a de jure standard might be a little early. I'd suggest that the goals/csfs should reflect today's reality. If dsdl takes off, the group can include it later. Cheers, Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Champion, Mike > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 3:46 PM > To: wsawg public > Subject: RE: D-AC010.1 proposal > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com] > > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 11:11 AM > > To: wsawg public > > Subject: D-AC010.1 proposal > > > > > > > > Synthisizing the discussion on this thread, what do people think of > > this proposal for D-AC010.1? > > > > Each new architectural area has its representation normatively > > defined in a syntactic schema language defined in a W3C > > Recommendation > > I personally would like to see it say "a synthetic schema > languaged defined > in a W3C Recommendation or a de jure International Standard" > to cover a > possible future scenario where one of the ISO DSDL > http://www.dsdl.org/ > specs are international standards *and* it proves more suitable for a > particular architectural area than W3C XSDL or RDFS. > > I won't make an issue of it since this is not likely to be a popular > proposal in W3C circles .... > >Received on Saturday, 1 June 2002 20:27:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:00 GMT