Re: [VOTE]: motion to transform Xerces into a top-level project as a member of the "federation" of XML projects

Can't help myself, I'm going to stir the pot again....

Andy - did you update the wiki with your thoughts?

Cheers,
	Berin


Andy Clark wrote:

> Neil Graham wrote:
> 
>> I've now rolled some of the points that we seem to have consensus on into
>> the original charter I suggested back at the beginning of April.  I've
>> posted it on the Wiki page [*] where Berin had kindly placed his 
>> reworking
>> of that document.
> 
> 
> Looks good. I am pleased to see the text explicitly provide
> a place for sub-projects that are not strictly parser impls.
> 
> However, I would like to see 4.3.b changed from "componentry"
> to something that reflects related function. For example,
> an "HTML" sub-project would likely have several "components".
> In other words, I'd rather see one HTML sub-project instead
> of two (e.g. "HTML DOM" and "HTML parser").
> 
> Also, would these "components" be separated by programming
> langauge as well? For example would an HTML parser in Java be
> a different sub-project than an HTML parser in C/C++?
> 
> Other than that, I like it. There are a few minor wording
> issues but the ideas and content are sound.
> 
>> If we can get agreement on that, then I for one would be cool for 
>> actually
>> voting on the resolution Berin drafted for us (which I've included below,
>> with a few modifications, chief among them an attempt at specifying the
>> composition of the PMC based on who it seems to me are the active
>> committers these days).  I haven't tried to fill in the field for PMC 
>> Chair
>> though.  :)
> 
> 
> Speaking of which, what ever happened to that tool someone
> was writing to tabulate who was posting to the mailing lists/
> commiting code and then mailing status reports to the mailing
> list each month? That would certainly help us stay on top of
> who is active vs. inactive.
>