XIDL standards [was: to-do list]

[ru...@us.ibm.com]

Glen Daniels wrote:
>
> In an ideal world, the community at large will be able to settle on
> a single standard for an XML service description, but I doubt this
> will actually happen.  I would perhaps like to see this group make
> a declaration of a "preferred" schema, though.

One thing that I do want everyone to agree with is that we intend to
maintain is conformance to relevant standards.  At the moment, the the XIDL
area seems wide open...but should this change, I would like this project to
change with it.

In other words, any and all support that is added along these lines, I
would like to see clearly labeled as experimental and subject to change.
Should a standard evolve, we conform.  Agreed?

Note: I do believe that if this group were to agree on a preferred schema,
this could have influence on the relevant standards bodies.

- Sam Ruby

Re: XIDL standards [was: to-do list]

[James Duncan Davidson <ja...@eng.sun.com>]

on 6/15/00 11:55 AM, rubys@us.ibm.com at rubys@us.ibm.com wrote:

> In other words, any and all support that is added along these lines, I
> would like to see clearly labeled as experimental and subject to change.
> Should a standard evolve, we conform.  Agreed?

+1

.duncan

Re: XIDL standards [was: to-do list]

[James Duncan Davidson <ja...@eng.sun.com>]

on 6/15/00 11:55 AM, rubys@us.ibm.com at rubys@us.ibm.com wrote:

> In other words, any and all support that is added along these lines, I
> would like to see clearly labeled as experimental and subject to change.
> Should a standard evolve, we conform.  Agreed?

+1

.duncan