Re: [xtm-wg] Status of Core Deliverables document

[Murray Altheim <altheim@eng.sun.com>]

Kal Ahmed wrote:
> 
> > [steve pepper]
> > > A number of the comments on the Review Specification urge (minor)
> > > changes to the DTD which is also contained in the Core Specification,
> > > so we really need to know at an early date whether the DTD is now
> > > cast in stone or not.
> > >
> > > Could the editors, and others, please make their position known?
> >
> > Well, "never say never" -- so I'm uncomfortable with "cast in stone."
> > But my view is that the bar for changes should be set almost
> > prohibitively high.
> >
> > I would also like some consideration to be given to versioning issues
> > for the DTD, so that we can have discussions that include the idea that
> > a change might not be possible for 1.0 but would be possible and
> > beneficial in 2.0 (for example).
> >
> 
> Why put off till later what can be fixed now ? If there is general consensus
> (and that is a big if) that something is wrong, what possible benefit is
> there in forcing users to wait till the next DTD upgrade, and so allowing
> the buildup of 'legacy' 1.0 XTM documents ? If something is wrong, fix it
> now.

As Sam stated, unless there is an outright error in the current XTM 1.0 DTD,
I agree entirely that it should be considered fixed. The *point* of fixing
the DTD is to allow XTM-based technologies to begin to be developed. If
the DTD is not solid and undergoes further changes, two things happen:

  1. there is no perceived stability to the core of the specification,
     and nobody will dare spend development time on a moving target. I
     usually call this the "Microsoft-syndrome," but it's a big problem
     in the software industry in general. 

Many "core" technologies have suffered from instability. HTML comes to mind.
RDF is stable, and even with its known problems has garnered enormous industry
support, such that other technologies have been based on it. My belief is that
the greater the stability, the wider the support, even with minor problems. 
Look at IP.

  2. any investment already being made in the current XTM 1.0
     specification will be lost. And if not lost, we court turning away
     those who might consider investing.

We promised to deliver a specific set of deliverables in Dallas, and we
delivered on that promise. We held open the editorial process five days 
longer than we originally had expected, and did not receive feedback on 
some of the issues that have now been reopened in discussions here. I 
note that these discussions have yet to settle into a single answer, even
among those promulgating the changes. Everyone has their opinions on what 
should or should be XTM, and the opinions themselves evolve too. We as a 
group can continue to churn on this forever (as anyone who has done 
standards work would agree), but at some point one delivers a version 1.0.
We have done that. What remains to be done in Paris is very clear to me,
and that does not include further modifications of the XTM DTD. There are
always possible "improvements" (in 2.0) but at this point any changes to
the core would only be damaging to the further success of XTM. The core 
of the spec is finished, now we must finish documenting what it is we 
have, warts and all.

[I just now have read Michel's message on this topic, and send this in
agreement with him. Stability of the DTD in order to promote development
should be our primary objective.]

In final note, I have spent the last three or four weeks working with 
the Cycorp Upper Ontology, transforming it into XTM syntax. I have not
noted any particular problem with the current DTD in representing the
various aspects of the ontology. I also note that Nikita has been 
successful in creating a variety of XSLT transformations from the 
existing ISO 13250-compatible DTDs into XTM. I think this should be
adequate demonstration that we're on track.

Murray

...........................................................................
Murray Altheim                            <mailto:altheim&#x40;eng.sun.com>
XML Technology Center
Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025

      In the evening
      The rice leaves in the garden
      Rustle in the autumn wind
      That blows through my reed hut.  -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com