Note that one does not preclude the other. The decision as to whether or not to become a TLP should not rest on the charter, although I think it is good to understand how the project is going to run prior to starting :>.
Agreed.
You'll have to pardon me here - what were the exact issues you had with the charter? I think there was a piece around top level code base?
Very simply: the draft charter defined Xerces sub-projects as parser implementations in different languages. And it had no allowance for sub-projects for a particular parser impl.
I don't see any problem with have a PMC that deals with all Xerces implementations but still considering the different implementations "projects" with their own sub-projects. For example, Xerces-J could have an HTML sub-project with the HTML DOM implementation and an HTML parser built from the Xerces framework. But the draft charter was explicit about defining a sub-project as an XML parser implementation in a particular language.
-- Andy Clark * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
