- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 11:41:24 -0600
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 10:36 -0500, Norman Walsh wrote: > / Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org> was heard to say: > | IMO, this means that one needs to consider the implications of adding a > | name to a namespace in the same way that one needs to consider minting > | a new media type if a backwards incompatible revision to a document > | format is produced. > > I agree that the implications have to be considered, but that doesn't > always mean that the right answer is to change the namespace (or the > media type). > > Consider the case of XSLT 2.0. Yes, let's do. I think writing up a number of cases like this would be a productive way to approach XMLVersioning-41. I'm not confident I know what the general principles are yet. Other... chapters of this book... that come to mind: -- XSLT extension functions -- adding <img> to HTML -- adding <form> to HTML -- adding <frames> and <script> to HTML -- SMIL system: extensions -- adding rdf:parseType="Collection" -- not adding rdf:parseType="Quote" -- adding Content-Transfer-Encoding to HTTP -- the emergence of TLS in HTTP (new URI scheme, new port; good idea or not?) -- CSS forward-compatible parsing rules -- SOAP must-understand -- the XPointer scheme registry > It uses the same namespace name (and > would use the same media type, if XSLT 1.0 had had an official media > type) as XSLT 1.0, despite the fact that there are new elements and > that the semantics of some of the existing elements have changed. > > The use of a version attribute means that an XSLT processor can "do > the right thing" (though what the right thing is varies a bit) > regardless of the fact that the vocabulary has changed. > > In the case of the XML namespace, all of the defined items are > idependent, so I don't see the problem. > > If you write software (or have written software) that will do > something weird and magical with xml:foobar that it wouldn't do with > xyzzy:foobar, I think your software has a bug. > > Be seeing you, > norm > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 14 February 2005 17:41:26 UTC