- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 21:43:16 -0400
- To: "noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Marc de Graauw" <marc@marcdegraauw.com>, www-tag@w3.org
On 5/17/07, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Mark Baker writes: > > > I think that your problem could be solved simply by minting a > > new media type when you break backwards compatibility. > > I can see the advantages, but I think there are also disadvantages. First > of all, certain languages go through many, many revisions that are at > least in some ways incompatible. It's not clear to me that as a practical > matter the media type system is administered to handle the repeated > registrations that would follow from your suggestion, IMO, what doesn't scale isn't the media type system, it's the deployment of backwards-incompatible changes to existing data formats. So my suggestion is simply "Don't do that" ... but if you must, then mint a new media type (and when that happens, Dave's version-in-the-type-name idea would be fine). Mark.
Received on Friday, 18 May 2007 01:43:19 UTC