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: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:22:52 -0500
To: "\"Martin J." Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Cc: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Jim Melton <jim.melton@oracle.com>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, chairs@w3.org, "spec-prod@w3.org" <spec-prod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1324063372.16421.95.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 17:47 +0900, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:
[...]
> it's crucial that specs be written so 
> that there is no need for such spec updates when Unicode is updated. 
[...]

> As an example, XML 1.0 for a long time was tied to 
> Unicode 2.0 when it came to element or attribute names and the like.

When we made XML we expected (naïvely) to be able to revise it as and
when Unicode changed.  Decoupling XML from the exact Unicode version was
a much cleaner solution in the long run.

But we are, I think, getting a little off-topic, except to note that
sometimes you want to say, "use the latest/current X", sometimes, "use
version 3 but 3.2 or later of X", sometimes "use version 3.2 exactly",
and the references of course must reflect that.

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 Friday, 16 December 2011 19:23:25 GMT

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