Re: COMPLEXITY BIG ISSUE

["Michael Champion" <mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "David RR Webber" <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>
To: "Nikola Stojanovic" <nstojano@cjds.com>
Cc: "[unknown]" <ebXML-Transport@lists.oasis-open.org>; "[unknown]"
<ebXML-Architecture@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2000 12:24 AM
Subject: COMPLEXITY BIG ISSUE (was) RE: Regarding the Thursday ebXML Conf
Call


> Take the first twenty ideas you think of - and then pick just the top 5
> that
> you must have, then figure out what that means for the writers of parsing
> components and consistent behaviour across platforms.  Then stop there!

I absolutely agree.  ebXML should keep things very simple and easy to
implement.  That is the strength of XML, (if not necessarily  of the related
specs that have come from the W3C).  XML itself was intended (in the words
of Tim Bray at XTech2000 last week) to "come in fast and under the radar,
and be on target before anyone knew about it".

The world needs ebXML to come in "fast and under the radar", not to sail
majestically into the harbor with all flags flying and all bells and
whistles sounding.