- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <len.bullard@intergraph.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 14:00:13 -0500
- To: "'L. David Baron'" <dbaron@dbaron.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Re limiting the document formats on the web: 1. XML itself is an application metalanguage. There is little interest in limiting language development in that community. Even here, alternatives to XML itself are likely to emerge. 2. Languages that are of most concern in fragmentation are the presentation/interaction classes, HTML, XHTML, SVG, X3D, and so on. There should be little interest in limiting the data languages except insofar as a given community of interest sees fit. Limits in the presentation languages likely will begin to occur although even the list you provided would be too small as it makes no provision for 3D. So knowing where to stop here is harder than it first appears. Innovative use of real time 3D and product data has great potential and has already been realized in non-web projects, so you are putting the web into the position of becoming a late-adopter market. 3. It is likely politically impossible to limit language development. There is no authority with that power. Even in CALS with the Department of Defense attempting to set such limits for the Tri-services, this failed miserably. 4. Profiles are not only created to enable device compatibility; they are the means to enable extensibility for directed evolution. Limits on this will have to come from the market if such limits are ever to be established. A force that might begin to limit this will be requiring conformance testing and test marks. This encourages the market to choose higher quality languages in accordance with fit, form and function of a procurement.
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2004 15:07:10 UTC