W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: ISSUE-55: Re-enable @profile in HTML5 (draft 1)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 14:58:22 -0700
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <A216E2A0-79C7-4865-B850-B7A6223677CC@apple.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Sep 28, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> ...
>> Defining versioning syntax now seems premature if the current de  
>> facto processing model is to ignore the versioning syntax  
>> (correct?) and the de facto authoring practice is not to emit the  
>> versioning syntax. If all goes well, versioning syntax is never  
>> needed.
>> If things go wrong and in the future there is a need to signal  
>> versioning, that bridge can be crossed then and versioning syntax  
>> added.
>
> How is this supposed to work if versioning isn't being considered  
> upfront?
>
> As far as I can tell, if versioning isn't there from version 1,  
> there's no way to may incompatible changes (which may be good, but  
> that's an orthogonal question).

If versioning is specified but implementations ignore it, and content  
does not specify it, then in practice it is no easier to make  
incompatible changes than if versioning hadn't been specified.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 21:59:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:49 GMT