W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > June 2002

RE: D-AC010.1 proposal

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2002 17:23:00 -0700
To: "'Champion, Mike'" <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>, "'wsawg public'" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <008901c209cb$a7bb0d60$4719e8d8@beasys.com>

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