Re: Extension/Extensibility examples in W3C Specifications

At 11:12 AM 5/7/2004, Alex Rousskov wrote:

>On Thu, 6 May 2004, Lynne Rosenthal wrote:
>
> > I think there is danger in this.  As Alex points out, for outsiders,
> > this doesn't work.
>
>I cannot think of any extension mechanism that makes
>required-to-understand extensions "work" for those who do not
>understand those extensions. Thus, I am not sure why negotiating
>extensions runtime is any more dangerous.

Looks like I may have understood.  I believe an extension must not break 
conforming functionality.  Extensions that break things or change them is 
not something to promote.  That is what I thought was being said.

--Lynne

Received on Friday, 7 May 2004 13:11:55 UTC