ISSUE-72: DTD required for v1.1 or v.next of XML Signature? [v.next (Design for XML Signature V Next)]

ISSUE-72: DTD required for v1.1 or v.next of XML Signature? [v.next (Design for XML Signature V Next)]

http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/track/issues/72

Raised by: Frederick Hirsch
On product: v.next (Design for XML Signature V Next)

Do we need to provide a DTD for XML Signature v1.1 or v.next? Is there a W3C policy related to providing DTDs with Recommendations? ( I did not see this topic in the W3C process or member guide documents, but may have missed it).

If a specification update is in the same namespace, and the previous version had a DTD, should the update continue to have a DTD and if it does not - would this be confusing or a problem. If it does, can the DTD have additions or changes. For a v.next, breaking changes are allowed, so it seems a DTD should no longer be required, but what is the current best practice?

This question arose because there appear to be some issues related to  adding new algorithms - I expect there will be more detail on the list regarding this topic. 

Would anyone have a concern if no DTD were defined going forward, for v.next? What about v1.1?