Fwd: [xml-dev] Re: {Loony speculation?} Re: [xml-dev] Does the W3C allow "reference implementations"?

Yes, I forwarded the whole message....

I did this because I think the points that Rick makes here are both relevant to the discussion about reference implementations, but also the sentiments in general could be applied to the specifications within this community--especially the sentiments about pluralism and making things workable within different contexts (s/cultures and laws/specifications and implementations/g).

Begin forwarded message:

> From: rjelliffe <[email protected]>
> Date: 27 November 2010 3:55:33 AM GMT
> To: <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Costello, Roger L." <[email protected]>, <xml-dev-ZnrGU9f/[email protected]>
> Subject: [xml-dev] Re: {Loony speculation?} Re: [xml-dev] Does the W3C allow "reference implementations"?
> 
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 08:59:30 +0000, Stephen Green <[email protected]> wrote:
>> True. But what about the 'ecumenical movement' to allow the respective
>> bodies to work together and their products to be aligned? "Surely" they
>> are meant to move towards greater unity aren't they.
> 
> Well, the ISO/IEC view of a standard is certainly that it is primarily an "agreement."
> This clearly resonates with some (me) more than others. In contrast, one of the most extreme views
> (and repellent) I have read about standards was a US corporate representative who wrote
> that standards are about "picking winners": spot the triumphalist worldview there!
> 
> It also opens the question of how regional standards bodies need can make standards
> workable within their cultures and laws, and indeed I suspect that one
> of the benefits of this kind of localization or acculturation could be to make us
> all richer as the approaches trickle between countries: just as many countries now
> have Ombudsmen even though it was not part of our cultures (or had been lost.)
> 
> For example, I associate Islamic law with a strong emphasis on supporting
> bargaining and mediation(1) and I wonder whether, for example,
> the XML DTD validation that returns merely "valid" or "invalid" (which may be too doltishly
> extreme to be much use, but congenial to people with a "guilty/not-guilty" mindset)
> --rather than, say, "almost right" or "needs rework"-- was a product of the original
> personalities that put the SGML standard together originally: the contractual capability
> was supported better than than the reporting capability.
> 
> 
>> That would be helped
>> if some of the minimalist 'surely's can be agreed and that seems to be
>> happening with shared concepts of 'conformance clause', 'implementation',
>> 'normative', keyword alignment ('MUST' = <bold>'shall'</bold>, etc) and now
> 
> I associate two rather different views with "ecumenical". One is the view
> that we need to agree on fundamentals and agree to disagree on or discard non-fundamentals
> (a "Fundamentalist" view). The development at OASIS of the CALS Exchange
> Table Model is a good example of fundamentalism in the standards world.
> 
> The other is a Catholic view, that "Truth is Symphonic" (2): that our different approaches
> make us richer and we need to support them. The focus on seeing what is good in what
> is different and what collective arises, rather than on paring truth to its dry bones.
> I'd see the ordered pluralism supported by TCP/IP, MIME and XML as this kind of mindset
> in the secular standards world. This view also emphasizes the need for active
> participation in standards making, not passive disinterest that others will
> do the work for you. Support for organic plurality and the need for
> participation are certainly part of my prism!
> 
> (I apologize to XML-DEVers who may think this is too far from technology, but I think
> it is intrinsic to standards questions like why some people or bodies want
> reference implementations and others don't. The pluralistic view would be that there
> should be a variety of standards groups with different rules in this regard, I guess.)
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Rick Jelliffe
> 
> 1)
> http://businessconflictmanagement.com/blog/2009/12/muslim-law-negotiation-and-mediation-in-a-different-context/
> 2) http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3203
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
> to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
> spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.
> 
> [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
> Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe-ZnrGU9f/[email protected]
> subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe-ZnrGU9f/[email protected]
> List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
> 

--
Andrew S. Townley <[email protected]>
http://atownley.org