RE: an idea: @context in coercion rules ?

> Backward compatibility requirement: yes, I agree.
> 
> I am less confident about the second. Publishing a rec but having a
> next version already as an official draft does not seem to be the right
> message to be sent out. Personally, I would prefer to wait for more
> extensive usage and implementation experiences to be gathered with a
> stable spec.

Well, the signal I want to send out is that there is a *small* set of
features that should be available *soon* in contrast to what usually
happens: at *some point in the future* there might be a *big* change (even
if it is backwards compatible).


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler