• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@r...>
• To: noah_mendelsohn@u...
• Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:02:38 -0500

noah_mendelsohn@u... wrote:
> I think the key question here is:  are the changes sufficiently small and 
> uninteresting that merely changing the "edition" number is appropriate, or 
> would it better serve users to use a more easily distinguished label?  My 
> current personal leaning (and again, not necessarily IBM's), is that this 
> change is big enough to merit a more visibly distinct name.  I suspect 
> that very few users of XML can tell you which edition of XML they're 
> using, until now very few have had need to care, and in fact I suspect 
> very few know that there is such a thing as an "edition".
>   


I'd be in favor of calling it XML 1.05.

There's big political barriers to calling it XML 1.1 (we have a failed 
specification that already carries that label), and it does less than 
XML 1.1 (thankfully).

Jonathan

• References:
  • Re: Ten Years Later - XML 1.0 Fifth Edition?
    • From: noah_mendelsohn@u...