- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 13:09:47 -0500
- To: craigg@crabacle.co.uk
- CC: connolly+xml@w3.org, site-comments@w3.org
> Craig Gannon wrote: > > Dan, > > Sorry to bother, but the W3C web site is somewhat misleading. Please > feel free to pass this on. Thanks; I am copying site-comments@w3.org, which has a public archive. http://www.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/ > > What XML standards have been ratified [[[ The base specifications are XML 1.0, W3C Recommendation Feb '98, and Namespaces, Jan '99. ]]] -- Extensible Markup Language (XML) http://www.w3.org/XML/ Wed, 16 May 2001 16:57:21 GMT There are other XML-related specifications that have been raitifed by W3C; cf http://www.w3.org/XML/#events and http://www.w3.org/TR/ > and are in the public domain? I'm not aware of any XML specifications in the public domain; W3C holds copyright on the above specifications. But our license is very liberal; it allows royalty-free redistribuition. > And which versions of those standards do they refer to? I don't understand this question. > I am constantly in discussion with Service Providers who refuse to use > XML 'until a standard is ratified'. I wonder... are these Service Providers waiting for some other organization to ratify XML? What organizations do they like to see ratification from? > - What is the position regarding > this? Our position is: "W3C Produces Standard-Setting, Interoperable Technologies Through Consensus" -- W3C press release of 17 April 2001 http://www.w3.org/2001/04/500-member-pressrelease > Many Thanks > > Regards > > Craig Gannon > > Tel: [...] > http://www.crabacle.co.uk -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ office: tel:+1-913-491-0501 pager: mailto:connolly.pager@w3.org (put return phone number in from/subject)
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2001 14:09:55 UTC