W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > December 2008

2.13, flawed?

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:20:13 +0000
Message-ID: <711a73df0812151020o187048a2yd7e3587c72d09530@mail.gmail.com>
To: "xproc List" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

As a consequence, future specifications must not change the semantics
of existing step types without changing their names.

Two points.

1. Will W3C accept such a constraint on a future WG? If this WG remains,
  do you want to so constrain yourselves? How about 'should'?

2. Can I change the syntax... so long as the semantics remain the same?


Dave Pawson
Docbook FAQ.
Received on Monday, 15 December 2008 18:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:26 UTC