[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: The version number in XML documents

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: The version number in XML documents
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 23:47:39 +1000
• References: <200207221249.NAA20455@m...>

From: "Richard Tobin" <richard@c...>
 
> >The best way to meet the goals of getting support for Unicode 3.1
> >out faster may be *not* to go 1.1 but just update 1.0 (strictly in
> >areas relating to tracking Unicode) with a suitable caution
> >that this will take a while to be deployed and that old parsers
> >may fail.
> 
> As you know, there are some people who would object very strongly to
> that.

Sure.  But it is a pragmatic trade-off against the potential for disruption
and flow-ons with other standards.

As I wrote elsewhere, I think the version number system is inadequate:
a three-part (for example) would give the Core WG more wiggle room.
   major.minor.edition
where a parser should accept any edition, older versions
of the minor, and only needs except one major number.  Whatever,
it needs to be better defined.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • Re: The version number in XML documents
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: URIs harmful (was RE: Article: Keeping pa ce with James Clark)
• Next by Date: Re: version numbers and infosets
• Previous by thread: Re: The version number in XML documents
• Next by thread: Re: The version number in XML documents
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread