- From: Hoylen Sue <hoylen@hoylen.com>
- Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 18:12:45 +1000
- To: "Wade, William (Bill)" <bwade@PROFDATA.COM>,
- Cc: public-xml-versioning@w3.org
Bill, Thank you for your comments. The "XML Schema Versioning Use Cases document" http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/xsd-versioning-use-cases/2006-01-31.html#p57 says: >>"The term "backward compatiable[sic]" will mean that an >>instance document defined by an old schema can be processed >>by an application that handles the new schema." Bill Wade says: > What we need is a definition of compatibility that is expressed solely > in terms of the instance documents and the schema themselves. How about > these definitions? > > "A given version of a schema is backward compatible with a prior version > of the same schema if any document created under the prior version of > the schema is still valid under the later version, assuming all nodes in > the instance document not present in the later version of the schema are > ignored." Two comments on this definition: Firstly, validation is not the only purpose of XML Schemas. This is why the definition does not rely on validity, but on the mouthful "can be processed by an application that handles the new schema". Secondly, "assuming all nodes in the instance document not present in the later version of the schema are ignored" is defining a mechanism to achieve backward compatibility rather than a definition of it. However, I do like the suggestion that we claify what exactly is classified as being "backward compatible" -- in this case it is the schemas. This is because in the XSD use case, there will be schema processors, schemas, and instances. The current definitions refers to "old schema" and "new schema" -- characterizations which do not apply to some of the versioning use cases. Hoylen -- ____________________________________________________________ hoylen@hoylen.com http://www.hoylen.com/
Received on Saturday, 4 March 2006 08:13:07 UTC