Re: Alternate syntax for required features.

On 4/16/09 7:36 PM, "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com> wrote:

> In either case the features work is a major part of the spec now, and should
> not be pushed off into an annexe, but should form a normative section in the
> main body.
> 
It is normative as currently specified, so it matters not whether it is in
an appendix or main body. I prefer an appendix, since it may be modified
more frequently. In any case, I still oppose the proposed change, for no
reason other than adding a new feature means adding a new attribute which
means changing the schema. Any change to a schema should require a very high
bar in my opinion.

G.


>