- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:52:00 -0700
- To: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
- Cc: marcosc@opera.com, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>, Thomas Landspurg <thomas.landspurg@gmail.com>, SUZANNE Benoit RD-SIRP-ISS <benoit.suzanne@orange-ftgroup.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:47 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Personally, I would recommend that we don't :) Version identifiers are >>> largely useless and experience shows that users use them wrong (e.g. a bunch >>> of SVG out there that's labelled as 1.1 is really 1.2, but people just >>> copy-paste the root element). >> >> Agreed. This is the reason we did not specify a version or platform >> attribute for widgets to date. > > That's the worst reason ever to do anything! If users are having > problems because they don't understand what they are copying and > pasting, then address that I think that is what we are doing. By not including a version identifier, we remove the temptation to make backwards incompatible changes protected by a version switch. Those are the type of changes that are harmful since they require more complex authoring than much of the web seems to use. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 08:52:40 UTC