From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2d69f4a8070dd707 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-05 14:03:46 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!news.uunet.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3EDFAC9F.5040802@cogeco.ca> From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Provisional Standards was RE: Ada.Networks.Sockets hierarchy (Provisional Standard?) References: <3EDC8FA6.2000308@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 16:48:31 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1054846112 198.96.223.163 (Thu, 05 Jun 2003 16:48:32 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 16:48:32 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38739 Date: 2003-06-05T16:48:31-04:00 List-Id: 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