Re: URIs quack like a duck

On Mon, May 29, 2000 at 08:50:59PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Michael Mealling scripsit:
> > The 'backward compatibility argument' doesn't hold much
> > water with me... How many applications actually depend on this change?
> > If it isn't in the hundreds of thousands then I don't really care....
> 
> Feh.  You are willing, then, to dishonor your word, provided only a
> few persons who relied on it are "inconvenienced" thereby?  Remind me
> never to call *you* as a witness for anything.
> 
> By issuing a Recommendation, the W3C as an organization pledged its word.

I never said break existing recommendations. Just that version 1.1 doesn't
really need to be 100% backward compatible with version 1.0 at this
early stage of the game...

-MM

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com

Received on Monday, 29 May 2000 21:27:22 UTC