Re: Provisional Standards was RE: Ada.Networks.Sockets hierarchy (Provisional Standard?)

["Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca>]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> I think that when discussing libraries - especially something like XML 
> that might be in quite a state of flux over the years - that we need a 
> mechanism different from the ARM. If a "Provisional Standard" committee 
> were to exist under some auspices that had the cooperation of some 
> reasonably large subset of the interested players, they could quickly 
> react to changes in the real world. XML may win or lose as a standard. 
> It might evolve or be "embraced and extended". New technology may emerge 
> that makes it obsolete. In this fast paced technological world, nobody 
> has a crystal ball that can see better than a year in advance. Waiting 
> for the ARM to react is a guarantee of failure.
> 
> SIGAda is a forum that could serve to develop and maintain a 
> "Provisional Standard" library. (Isn't that where ASIS originated?) Or 
> the vendors could form up a research corporation that might even become 
> self-sustaining if it produced a library that could generate revenue in 
> the form of support, updates, etc. (Such a research corporation might 
> even be able to get more developed by volunteers by promising some kind 
> of royalties for contributions that are accepted.) I think the forum 
> could be found and the work accomplished, but it needs some kind of 
> direction and acceptance by the vendors.
> 
> BTW: I agree about the name. If "Provisional Standard" is not 
> acceptable, go call it "Harold" for all that it matters to me. ;-)
> 
> MDC

OK, now that some initial discussion has occurred, is there any further
interest in proceeding with the generation of a "provisional standard"?

If so, what should it be called, and were would you like to host it?

I am going to as SourceForge to remove the project that was set up
for me, since it is now inappropriately named (ada0y-net-std).

I know there is some casual interest, but is there any real interest
in starting a "formal project"?   Or is there an existing one that
people should be "pointed to"?

Warren.


> Robert C. Leif wrote:
> 
>> We already have a group on building Ada APIs for XML. I believe that I am
>> the Chair. I believe that we should minimize the contents of the Ada
>> standard, yet maximize the contents of standardized Ada libraries. The
>> creation and modification of libraries often is a continuous process. For
>> instance, none of us knows what the detailed structure of XML will be 
>> at the
>> end of 5 years. However, we can design a system for creating, what I 
>> would
>> call provisional standards, i.e. a binding for which we have a consensus
>> with the understanding that it may have to be changed in the future.
>>
>> An additional virtue of the use of provisional standards is that they 
>> can be
>> extensively tested by implementation and use prior to their formally 
>> being
>> incorporated into Ada.
>> Parenthetically, I have no strong attachment to the term provisional
>> standard. If there is a better or more precise term, so be it.

-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg