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

[Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>]

Murray et al,

At 09:14 15/01/01 -0800, Murray Altheim wrote:
>Whether or not the remark was made in humour, I find it insulting and
>rather outrageous that the four editors of the XTM specification are being
>compared to radical members of the Chinese Communist Party.

Please accept my apologies; it was not my intention to offend.
I just needed a label to put on the entity representing the four
of you and this seemed humorously appropriate. I guess it's the
kind of borderline humour that shouldn't be risked in email, even
among friends...

>Such rhetoric,
>taken with some of your other remarks, is counterproductive and seems to 
>deliberately set up a hostile atmosphere, especially so with our next 
>meeting only days away. Why? Is your point to denegrate the work that has
>been done and destabilize the AG to better serve your ability to alter the
>specification, to remove the "Gang of Four", or to better promote the ISO 
>version over the products of TopicMaps.Org? I ponder this and really don't
>understand. I have in the past considered you among the voices of reason.

And I still am! All the motives you attribute to me are wrong. My
only goal is to get the discussion out into the open, make sure the
whole AG is aware that some people fear that the process was abused,
and prepare for clearing the air early on in Paris. Like everyone
else in the AG, I want XTM to be delivered early enough, be
sufficiently robust and stable, and inspire enough confidence, that
the year 2001 will go down in web history as the Year of the Topic Map!

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on one's point of view) the
TopicMaps.Org charter was designed so that *everything* is as open as
possible. As a result we have to accept that our dirty linen (and all
committees *have* dirty linen) gets to be aired in public. That will
inevitably hurt some sensibilities, so let me reiterate that the
"Gang of Four" has my deepest respect for the commitment, enthusiasm,
and sheer determination that they showed in the run-up to Washington.

I just wish they had been doing what *I* at least thought I was voting
to give them a mandate for -- the more or less secretarial job of
capturing the consensus achieved in Dallas) -- rather than modifying
and/or further developing it in isolation. I am fully aware that they
did what they did for the good of the cause, but I also believe that
the means employed were unacceptable. This is what needs to be ironed
out in Paris.

Steve

--
Steve Pepper, Chief Technology Officer <pepper@ontopia.net>
Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Information Association)
Ontopia AS, Maridalsveien 99B, N-0461 Oslo, Norway
http://www.ontopia.net/  phone://+47 90827246/


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

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