- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 08:04:59 -0400
- To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
- Cc: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com, "Marc de Graauw" <marc@marcdegraauw.com>, "Marc de Graauw" <mdegraau@xs4all.nl>, www-tag@w3.org
On 5/17/07, David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com> wrote: > What about incorporating a version # in the media type? > > Say application/soap+1dot2+xml, etc. That's fine. On the ietf-types list, I think I've recommended something similar for at least one format which made backwards incompatible changes. > Then say in the media type definition that by definition any minor > version change is compatible, and any incompatible change will be > accompanied by a major version change. I'm ok with the second part of that, but if a new version is compatible, then a new media type shouldn't be required. Mark.
Received on Friday, 18 May 2007 12:05:07 UTC