Re: id is Candidate Recommendation (Call for Implementations)

* John Boyer wrote:
>Either way, a separate issue emerges.  Some group at the core 
>of the W3C needs to come to a decision about what a namespace 
>means and whether additions, deletions or changes to the schema 
>(the collection of names) necessitates a change of namespace URI.

I would suggest to raise this issue on www-tag. There is indeed a need
for clarification; I am regularly stunned by claims on such matters,
e.g. in Dean Jackson claims that "W3C also
broke this rule when adding Ruby to the XHTML namespace ... W3C goofed
up and regret the mistake" and you seem to be in line with Dean here;
common practise is however to add new elements and attributes to "name-

>For example, would it be permissible for the XForms working group 
>to issue XForms 1.1 without changing the namespace URI from the one 
>used in XForms 1.0?

XForms 1.1 adds new features to XForms, W3C prohibes publication of
technical reports that add new features to a previous Recommendation
without changing the major version number. W3C also prohibes reusing
old version numbers if non-editorial changes are made. Refer to the
publication rules for
details. Refer to for namespace rules.
So it seems not all that relevant whether there is a rule against re-
using the XForms 1.0 namespace in XForms 1.1.

>It is very easy for me to illustrate the disastrous consequences of
>such a decision.

That would be most interesting, please make sure you include such a
discussion when raising this issue on www-tag.
Björn Höhrmann · ·
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 ·
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · 

Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2005 18:59:14 UTC