Re: 1.0?

This seems like a no-brainer. It can't hurt, and may help to add a 
version number...
Karl Dubost wrote:

>
>
> Le 05-07-29 à 13:09, Lofton Henderson a écrit :
>
>> The cover page of PR SpecGL 1.0,
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/qaframe-spec/ ,
>> is interesting in that it doesn't contain a version number.
>>
>> While we don't anticipate a 1.1 or 2.0 soon, and as I recall  
>> pubrules doesn't require it (but suggests it), it seems pretty  
>> common amongst W3C Recommendations.
>>
>> Should Rec SpecGL have a major version number?
>
>
> That was a question I raised at a meeting (I can't find the  
> discussion). We never reached consensus on that one.
>