- From: John Cowan <cowan@locke.ccil.org>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 100 23:09:36 -0400 (EDT)
- To: lesch@w3.org (Susan Lesch)
- Cc: xml-editor@w3.org, xml-dev@xml.org, w3t-comm@w3.org
Susan Lesch scripsit: > > John Cowan wrote: > > >This goes well beyond the goals of XML 1.0 2nd ed, which is not meant to > >change radical things like your #3. It is simply a republication with > >the errata incorporated of XML 1.0. > > So far, W3C technical publications [1] come in version numbers, part > numbers, and Levels, but not in "editions." May I suggest that what > you call the 2d edition follow the naming convention in XML 1.0, and > be titled "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1" or "1.0.1," whatever > number suits the editors? A change to the XML version number would make existing 1.0 XML parsers unable to cope. Since we are not making incompatible changes, a new version would be inappropriate. John Cowan cowan@ccil.org Yes, I know the message date is bogus. I can't help it. --me, on far too many occasions
Received on Wednesday, 24 May 2000 22:46:33 UTC