W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > spec-prod@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: References Re: What are the requirements/problems? Re: Working on New Styles for W3C Specifications

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 22:21:00 -0600
Message-ID: <4EE975AC.5070304@aptest.com>
To: spec-prod@w3.org


On 12/14/2011 5:02 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> Well, for a change I'll have to agree with Marcos. Not adopting XML 
> 1.1 blindly -- good. Pretending XML 1.0 5th edition does not exist -- 
> not good.

I know this seems somewhat off topic, but... we didn't ignore it.  Each 
edition of XML 1.0 is a W3C Recommendation.  You can claim conformance 
to any or all.  That family of standards worked its way up the editions 
until one of them broke our ecosystem.  Then we stopped.  This is 
legitimate.  It is not capricious.

It is not sufficient nor reasonable to say 'update everything' to match 
an incompatible change in an underlying standard.  In particular, in 
this case, there was no remaining working group with the charter to do 
so.  This happens ALL THE TIME.  The W3C / ANSI / ISO / ECMA / IETF / 
... set of interactions is so mind-bogglingly complicated that after 25 
years of working in standards I still can't keep it straight.  So... in 
my opinion there must be a way to easily and consistently reference both 
"this and all future versions" of a specification and "this and ONLY 
this version" of a specification.

-- 
Shane McCarron
Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
+1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2011 04:24:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:19:18 GMT