charter issue on @src

Manu,

We do not have a problem. Here is the answer I got from Ian:

> From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
> Date: 15 September 2011 17:25:06 CEST
> To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
> Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Small charter issue
> 

[snip]

> 
>> 
>> [[[
>> Backwards compatibility with RDFa 1.0 is of great importance. That means, in general, that all triples that are produced via the October 2008 version of RDFa, should still be generated in the new version. For each new feature, if there is doubt or a perceived problem with respect to this, the guideline should be not to include the feature in the set of modifications. The two minor features the Working Group has identified and which may constitute possible exceptions to this rule, is the default XML Literal generation (see the proposal and the corresponding thread for details), and the list of predefined @rel/@rev values that automatically generate triples (these predefined values are under re-evaluation by the HTML community, and inconsistencies may occur if all RDF triples are generated).
>> ]]]
>> 

[snip]

> Hi Ivan,
> 
> Your charter says SHOULD in the paragraph you site. I think no change is required to the charter. I support drawing attention to this change (as being incompatible), being sure to justify it strongly in the text of the document.  People can object to the change at Last Call.
> 
> The decision about the change should be made by the time the group enters CR. "At-risk" is about implementation, not about general deployment questions or acceptance of group decisions.
> 
> Ian

Ie, we are fine. Yay!

Shane, I am happy to make the change on the core spec tomorrow morning my time if you want.

Ivan

>