W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2009

[widgets] P&C Last Call comments, versioning

From: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 00:44:30 +0200
To: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FAA1D89C5BAF1142A74AF116630A9F2C0A26D782E0@OBEEX01.obe.access-company.com>
Hi Marcos, All,

These are my further considerations for the versioning of the widget contents.

My understanding is that versioning is/may be included in namespace definition.

The usage of the "version" attribute in P&C seems to be the first usage of this attribute for document version and not for specification format versioning.

P&C, an an interchange format is versionless.

I have reviewed a few recommendations from http://www.w3.org/TR/.
a) SVGT1.2 http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SVGTiny12-20081222/ says:
"Future versions of this specification will maintain backwards compatibility with previous versions of the language"
SVGT1.2 uses version attribute to describe the version of the standard that was used to write the SVG document.
They also use "baseProfile" as a further means for content versioning/requirements in http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-SVGTiny12-20081222/single-page.html#implnote-VersionControl.

http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-sml-if-20090512/#Packaging says:
"The SMLIFVersion attribute is defined on the model element and may be useful when diagnosing failures encountered while processing SML-IF documents. For example, if a document asserts conformance with version 1.1 of the SML-IF specification and a human can see that it is not in fact conformant, then it is likely that the problem occurred during the production of the document. If the same document appears to humans to be conformant, then the focus of diagnosis might shift toward the SML-IF consumer and its invocation parameters."

http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdfa-syntax-20081014/#docconf says:
There SHOULD be a @version attribute on the html element with the value "XHTML+RDFa 1.0"

http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets-digsig/#versions-namespaces-and-identifiers says:
"Note: No provision is made for an explicit version number in this specification. If a future version of this specification requires
explicit versioning of the document format, a different namespace will be used."

The conclusions:
1. To avoid semantic collisions with other W3C standards, I suggest changing "version" to e.g. "docversion".
2. The text similar to the one from DigSig spec could be put to P&C 8.1, just to show roadmap and intentions.

________________________________________

Access Systems Germany GmbH
Essener Strasse 5  |  D-46047 Oberhausen
HRB 13548 Amtsgericht Duisburg
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michel Piquemal, Tomonori Watanabe, Yusuke Kanda

www.access-company.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments hereto may contain information that is privileged or confidential, and is intended for use only by the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of the information by anyone else is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this document in error, please notify us promptly by responding to this e-mail. Thank you.
Received on Sunday, 31 May 2009 22:45:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:31 GMT