- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:11:59 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
I am forwarding some more of Ian's comments with his permission
though he says his comments (especially the last bullet point)
should not be considered binding without more context.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 2010 August 11 11:55
To: Grosso, Paul
Subject: Re: short name "xlink" should point to "xlink11"
My take is this:
* When we announce the purpose of a URI, we shouldn't change it
lightly.
* /TR/xlink was originally defined to be for XLink 1.0
* We do have suggestions for multiple latest version uris:
http://www.w3.org/2005/05/tr-versions
* Seems ok if you want to change the purpose of /TR/xlink to do so
in the next edition of XLink 1.1, with clear mention that XLink 1.0
still available at the dated URI. I don't recommend minting /TR/
xlink10 since there won't be any more of those anyway.
I'm ok to leave as is unless there's a big demand to change it. And if
there is a demand to change it, I want to see whether there are any
issues that might arise, which is why I sent a note to the staff.
I'll sit back and wait to hear from you.
_ Ian
Received on Wednesday, 11 August 2010 17:12:42 UTC