chad fowler wrote:


> To me, it doesn't make sense to have a static,
> read-only document when you could have a dynamic
> document that anyone can contribute to. 


Anyone can contribute to the document by discussing the issues @ the 
Wiki and @ ruby-talk.

In an earlier
> post, you said that you feared that the Wiki would
> give the ability for one person to dominate and
> completely force a single opinion onto the discussion.
>  A static document that you maintain, *ensures* that
> this will happen.


No. We need to agree on one list of requirements, targets, and priorities.
If anyone can edit this document to his liking, forth and back, how will 
be be able to present one final agreement?
"
I just try to list some main aspects that the majority of the community 
agreed on,
and insights from implementers and experts.
Reasons and motivations can be found @, and further discussion can
take place @ ruby-talk and
   http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?XMLinRuby
.
"

Imagine a W3 spec as a Wiki; it would change every minute, without 
becoming a coherent construct.


> So, this is my formal request to abandon the static
> text file that you are maintaining and move all
> related documentation to the Wiki.
> 
> All in favor?


If so, anyone can copy anything from my page, then do anything with it. 
I won't be available then, because I don't see a chance to agree on one 
list this way.

Perhaps an expert like Simon, who is rspected as XML expert by everyone, 
could take over and be the one who tries to reflect the opinions of the 
majority of the community, implementers, and experts.

Tobi

-- 
Tobias Reif
http://www.pinkjuice.com/myDigitalProfile.xhtml

go_to('www.ruby-lang.org').get(ruby).play.create.have_fun
http://www.pinkjuice.com/ruby/