Re: 2.1 Must Allow Matching on Default Namespace Witho

On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 11:59:25AM -0700, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> > What's published so far is a requirements statement. Don't assume that
> > anyone knows what the solution to the requirement will be. It's quite
> > possible that the working group will decide that there's no acceptable
> > solution that meets the compatibility goals. All the requirements statement
> > says is that there's a recognized problem that needs to be addressed.
> 
> Hmm.  OK, but in response to my xsl:script comment, Daniel Viellard posted 
> that it's too late: it's already enshrined int he 1.1. requirements.  Daniel 
> of course used to be a W3C staffer.

  Changing a Working Group requirement is possible, note for example the
tendance to publish them as Working Drafts (instead of NOTEs), indicating
they are 'live' documents.
  Clearly, changing a requirement in the WG lifetime indicates a problem
but it's not impossible in most case. Of course it's difficult since
that's the document which defines the framework on which the work is done
and a number of technical decision are directly related to requirements.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard@xxxxxxxxxx  | libxml Gnome XML toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list