W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-xml@w3.org > December 2011

Re: <time> values in HTML5

From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:27:54 -0500
To: tantek@cs.stanford.edu
Cc: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org, HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, public-html-xml@w3.org
Message-ID: <1322850474.5100.48.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Mon, 2011-11-21 at 16:46 +0000, Tantek Çelik wrote:
[...]
> BTW as a point of W3C process, I don't think it's permissible to add
> new features to a CR without first going back to a last call that
> includes those new features.

It's "new features that would invalidate someone's review" -- sometimes
if you can show the major implementors support the change, and that it
makes sense, and of course is very small, you can make it.  However, I'm
not trying to encourage this.

An example is that five of the type names were changed in XSLT 2 and
XQuery and XPath 2 and XQueryX without going back to last call: they
went from being in their own namespace to being in the XML Schema
namespace (e.g. in XQuery, associated with "xs:" instead of "xdt:"), and
this was a considerable improvement for users.

Adding new lexical forms for existing forms is something that, if the
Working Group felt it appropriate, I can imagine happening; adding new
sorts of types is a much bigger change, because it would affect all the
specs that use the type annotations and type system provided by XSD, so
I don't think that would be OK.

I hope that's a little clearer.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Received on Friday, 2 December 2011 18:29:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 December 2011 18:29:12 GMT