- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@macfaq.com>
- Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 07:22:14 -0700
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Cc: xml-editor@w3.org
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > The word 'erratum' is perhaps misleading in this context. This is a > change, but an allowed change: the changes in XML 1.0 5th Edition fall > into class 3 from section 7.6.2 Classes of Changes to a Recommendation > [3], as they affect conformance without introducing new features. I do not believe class 3 applies here. This is a change that adds new features, specifically support for additional languages in name characters. They also enable undefined Unicode characters to be used, musical symbols, and other things that would have been originally excluded even if Unicode 5.0 predated XML 1.0. > We have brought this forward because we believe the benefits outweigh > the costs, based on a number of efforts to sample the likely response. > > Please let us know if you are satisfied with this response. I am not satisfied with this response. My original comments stand. This is an abuse of process, actively harmful to interoperability, imposes significant extra work on vendors, and reduces the net usability of XML. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@macfaq.com
Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 14:22:54 UTC