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.comReceived on Monday, 29 May 2000 21:27:22 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Tuesday, 12 April 2005 12:17:23 GMT