W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2010

Re: ISSUE-4 (html-versioning) (vs. ISSUE-30 longdesc)

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:33:27 -0800
Cc: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, 'Adam Barth' <w3c@adambarth.com>, 'HTML WG' <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <B5E33CAF-D0A1-4F20-A2BE-DCA2E4348ED6@apple.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

On Feb 28, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > - As far as I can tell, Atom has no in-band format version  
> indicator.
>> There is a namespace URI but no indication of intent to change it  
>> for future Atom versions.
>
> Atom has no in-band format version indicator.  There is a namespace  
> URI, but the explicit intent was NOT to change it for potential  
> future Atom versions.  See:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287#section-6.2

Sam, I'm curious. Why did the ATOMPUB WG choose not to have a version  
identifier? Was there any archived discussion of this which you could  
point us to?

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Monday, 1 March 2010 02:34:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:59 UTC