- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 16:23:53 -0500
- To: W3C QA Interest Group <www-qa@w3.org>
- Cc: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 00:02:32 UTC
The topic is still going on. See the mail from Norman Walsh on www-tag mailing list [XMLVersioning-41] Comments and Suggestions on Draft Extensibility Finding http://www.w3.org/mid/OFAF527DE1.9F11FBE0-ON85256FAB.007EB8D5@lotus.com It's a very interesting mail to read. [[[ I think it's fair to say that some of the most successful Web technologies have succeeded as much from the ways that they are inflexible as from the ways that they are extensible. XML, which is arguably a success, had as one of its original goals: "The number of optional features in XML is to be kept to the absolute minimum, ideally zero."[6] ]]] This, for example, goes in the direction of QA WG recommendations. As It's not always good to have extensibility and that it's absolutely necessary to evaluate the costs and the benefits.
Received on Wednesday, 23 February 2005 00:02:32 UTC