- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 13:11:59 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
I am forwarding some more of Ian's comments with his permission though he says his comments (especially the last bullet point) should not be considered binding without more context. -----Original Message----- From: Ian Jacobs [mailto:ij@w3.org] Sent: Wednesday, 2010 August 11 11:55 To: Grosso, Paul Subject: Re: short name "xlink" should point to "xlink11" My take is this: * When we announce the purpose of a URI, we shouldn't change it lightly. * /TR/xlink was originally defined to be for XLink 1.0 * We do have suggestions for multiple latest version uris: http://www.w3.org/2005/05/tr-versions * Seems ok if you want to change the purpose of /TR/xlink to do so in the next edition of XLink 1.1, with clear mention that XLink 1.0 still available at the dated URI. I don't recommend minting /TR/ xlink10 since there won't be any more of those anyway. I'm ok to leave as is unless there's a big demand to change it. And if there is a demand to change it, I want to see whether there are any issues that might arise, which is why I sent a note to the staff. I'll sit back and wait to hear from you. _ Ian
Received on Wednesday, 11 August 2010 17:12:42 UTC