- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:20:13 +0000
- To: "xproc List" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
As a consequence, future specifications must not change the semantics of existing step types without changing their names. Two points. 1. Will W3C accept such a constraint on a future WG? If this WG remains, do you want to so constrain yourselves? How about 'should'? 2. Can I change the syntax... so long as the semantics remain the same? regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. Docbook FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Monday, 15 December 2008 18:20:49 UTC