- From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 23:41:49 -0400
- To: Innovimax W3C <innovimax+w3c@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 19:09 +0200, Innovimax W3C wrote: > Whatever we do, I think that the minimum to do is to allow someone > following http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink to see that there exists a 1.1 > version of this spec that is a REC > > The way to make it visible could be > > 1) point www.w3.org/TR/xlink to www.w3.org/TR/xlink11 > 2) modify www.w3.org/TR/xlink to add a note saying that this spec has > been superseded by 1.1 Making /TR/xlink go to 1.1 makes sense to me - people referring to an explicit version should have used a dated reference. Unfortunately, XML Core in xlink 1.1 used /TR/xlink to refer to 1.0 of the spec, so changing this would mean we'd have to edit the spec. I've asked Ian if that would mean a Proposed Edited Rec, and expressed the personal opinion that it's less to happen in that case. We'd also have to add XLink 1.0 to Earlier Versions in the header. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
Received on Thursday, 12 August 2010 03:41:53 UTC