P.S. I should have said that the "negatives" to having a published formal spec are only from the vendor's (Macromedia's) perspective. From their customers' perspective, there are not negatives, only positives.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vince Bonfanti > Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2005 9:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [CFCDev] WOT: CFML as XML > > >From a business perspective, having a published formal > specification of > >CFML > is a two-edged sword. The reasons to publish a formal spec > are: (1) to allow the possibility of alternate > implementations; and, (2) to allow the possibility of > "others" to contribute to the evolution of the specification. > > The negative to (1) is that you open the door wider to > competition (as BlueDragon demonstrates, that door is already > open even without a formal spec). The worst-case scenario > from a commercial software vendor's perspective is that > someone uses the published spec to create an open source > implementation that puts you out of business. The negative to > (2) is that you lose control of the spec, though I think that > Sun has demonstrated a good way to allow outsiders to > participate in development of Java specs without losing > control of the process. > > The positives to having a published formal spec is that you > remove the stigma of CFML being a proprietary language > supported by only a single vendor. For example, there would > have been no wailing or gnashing of teeth when Macromedia > acquired Allaire, or when the Adobe acquisition of Macromedia > was announced, because the future of CFML would no longer be > so dependent on a single company. Another positive is that > you can more openly allow your customers to contribute to the > language specification process. > > I've made several proposals over the past few years (though > not recently) to people fairly high up in Macromedia to move > to a more open, formal process for specifying CFML. They're > not interested, and that's fine--they need to make decisions > based on their own perceived best interests. But, I think > their decision to keep CFML closed and proprietary ultimately > means CFML will always be a niche technology that probably > won't grow in market share much beyond what it has today. > > On a sort of related note, I'm always puzzled when people who > embrace "open" > technologies, such as Linux and Java, can also embrace > ColdFusion, which a "closed" technology; there seems to be a > contradiction here. In fact, this contradiction seems to > exist within the ColdFusion development team itself, which > relies heavily on open source technology (Axis, > JasperReports, iText, various Jakarta projects), but is > resistant to opening CFML. > > It seems to me that if "openness" is a good thing at the > operating system and platform levels, then it's also a good > thing at the application server level. Or maybe the embrace > of Linux and Java is less about "openness" and more about > "not Microsoft", in which case there's no contradiction in > also embracing ColdFusion. > > Vince Bonfanti > http://blog.newatlanta.com > > New Atlanta Communications, LLC > http://www.newatlanta.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barney Boisvert > > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 8:44 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [CFCDev] WOT: CFML as XML > > > > On 8/5/05, Joseph Flanigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <snip /> > > > A much better energy would be asking how to make CF better > > business choice. > > > > I'm interested (as an unaffected bystander) in why you think CF not > > having a formal language spec that is available to the > public makes it > > a poor business choice. This might be better taken > off-list, but I'm > > definitely interested. I don't know about you, but I'm buying a > > language implementation, not a langauge specification. > > > > cheers, > > barneyb > > > > -- > > Barney Boisvert > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 360.319.6145 > > http://www.barneyb.com/ > > > > Got Gmail? I have 50 invites. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). CFCDev is supported by New Atlanta, makers of BlueDragon http://www.newatlanta.com/products/bluedragon/index.cfm An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
