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

Re: References

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 23:27:03 +0100
To: spec-prod@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v60lzdnn64w2qv@annevk-macbookpro.local>
On Sat, 24 Dec 2011 18:15:26 +0100, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>  
wrote:
> On 24/12/2011 10:37, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>> But for cases where it does not break backwards compatibility, then I
>> should be able to have it.
>
> There are many other reasons than backward compatibility for wanting to
> refer to a versioned spec. Xpath2 (and soon 3) are to a large degree
> compatible with 1, but they are also considerably larger languages and
> many developers (notably browser implementations) have chosen to stay at
> version 1. It would be utterly confusing if references to xpath in DOM
> API silently updated to refer to xpath3, if implementations are all at
> 1. This is the _normal_ case.

I do not think so. For the documents listed on http://platform.html5.org/  
I think browsers would want to implement the latest of them for pretty  
much all of them, with the exception of those that are not fully backwards  
compatible or have not as much interest from the developer community.

(I removed chairs by the way. Not sure how that's a relevant list for  
discussing references.)


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Saturday, 24 December 2011 22:27:33 GMT

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