- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 23:29:11 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
Hi Norm, all, I think that you make a fair and good assessment of the issue but would like to point out that there are two terms which I find strangely absent from it: versioning and extensibility. Indeed it would appear to me that this issue — at least if kept more generic than the evolution of just the xml:* namespace which both my personal feeling and offline exchanges with others lead me to believe it should — is intimately tied to that other V&E issue. And, oh joy! it's not related to XML Schema. Rules describing when one should change the namespace when a language is evolved and what one should not do while keeping the same namespace would IMHO be extremely valuable to all those that define XML languages. Seeing as apparently several W3C WGs have adopted different approaches to this issue precisely in the versioning situation (XForms 1.1 introduces a new namespace, all version of SVG keep the initial one), having the TAG tie the two issues and provide food for consistency would certainly be welcome. [removed the XML CG to avoid cross-posting between public/member lists] -- Robin Berjon Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 22:29:13 UTC