Rejected mail. Please confirm your From address before you send
any message to the list.
Forwarded message 1
I just sent this to XML-Dev (which has been discussing "What's wrong with
SVG" of late, hence the title.)
I'm deeply concerned that CC/PP is both a critical component and radically
overdesigned.
>Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2000 19:52:04 -0500
>To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@xml.org>
>From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>
>Subject: what's wrong with CC/PP
>
>As long as we're talking about controversial design choices...
>
>The latest draft of Composite Capabilities/Preference Profiles (CC/PP) has
me really wondering. (http://www.w3.org/TR/CCPP-ra) CC/PP is a critical
part of making XHTML and other XML vocabularies easily exchangeable,
allowing clients, servers, and other participants to describe their
capabilities.
>
>Over a year since RDF Schemas went into Proposed Recommendation status,
apparently never to return, this critical spec-in-progress announces that
it plans to define its vocabulary items in RDF Schemas.
>
>RDF Schema isn't the only W3C spec referenced here - P3P, digital
signatures and XML all pop up, along with WAI, and of course HTTP - but it
seems like this is some really critical work to be building on foundations
that aren't nearly stable (or, from some perspectives, even likable) yet.
WAP and the IETF CONNEG work are also referenced.
>
>The "Executive Summary of Requirements" notes "Flexibility, extensibility,
and distribution," but appears to have entirely forgotten simplicity.
>
>Yikes! Is it too late to derail this train?
>
Simon St.Laurent
XML Elements of Style / XML: A Primer, 2nd Ed.
Building XML Applications
Inside XML DTDs: Scientific and Technical
Cookies / Sharing Bandwidth
http://www.simonstl.com