- From: Jerven Tjalling Bolleman <Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss>
- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:14:43 +0200
- To: "SPARQL 1.2 Community Group" <public-sparql-12@w3.org>
Hi All, I thought to quickly write about my thoughts regarding backwards compatibility. These are just my thoughts and I am just providing them for discussion. My feelings on the matter are that there are two kinds of backwards compatibility. The first is "formally" not backwards compatible, i.e spec A says a certain kind of query should return a specific result and spec A+ defines a second different result, then it is not formally backwards compatible. Second is the "marketplace" backwards compatible. Same situation as above, but no one ever implemented A as specified or no-one ever send that kind of query. Then while there is a formal change in behaviour no one is impacted because no one used the behaviour. I am OK with breaking "formal" backwards compatibility but I am not at all keen on breaking "marketplace" backwards compatibility. In that regards I see as an example to follow the Java language stewards whom have the same kind of problem. There is a lot of code in the wild, doing even wilder stuff, making money and solving problems. Breaking such code should only be done in extremis and after careful evaluation. Being a very small community I think we can't afford splits like python2 to 3 or even worse Perl5 to 6. Regards, Jerven -- Jerven Tjalling Bolleman SIB | Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics CMU - 1, rue Michel Servet - 1211 Geneva 4 t: +41 22 379 58 85 - f: +41 22 379 58 58 Jerven.Bolleman@sib.swiss - http://www.sib.swiss
Received on Wednesday, 24 April 2019 10:15:15 UTC