- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 13:52:54 +0100
- To: "Matt Oshry" <matto@tellme.com>
- Cc: <www-voice@w3.org>
* Matt Oshry wrote: >>* Matt Oshry wrote: >>>DOM Level 2 core reflects the W3C recommendation that was most widely >>>implemented in the industry by platform vendors at the time the feature >>>set for VoiceXML 2.1 was agreed upon by the VBWG. DOM Level 3 builds on >>>DOM Level 2 but specifies a set of functionality for which there was >>>not broad enough implementation experience to justify referencing it >>>while still meeting all the requirements laid out in [2]. >> >>Well, I did not ask to add functionality but to reference to more recent >>specification of the same feature set. Are there technical differences >>between DOM2 and DOM3 that hinder making reference to DOM3? > >The Voice Browser Working Group, in consultation with an editor of the >DOM L2 and DOM L3 specifications, has concluded that DOM L2, a full W3C >Recommendation, sufficiently and completely describes the functionality >necessary for the purposes of VoiceXML 2.1. If you feel that there are >technical differences between DOM L2 and DOM L3 that require the VBWG to >choose DOM L3 instead of DOM L2 for VoiceXML 2.1, please provide the >working group with the specifics by December 22, 2005. This doesn't address my concern, I think you should refer to the latest version unless there are specific reasons not to do that. You haven't so far provided technical rationale why DOM Level 2 Core makes the better reference here. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 12:58:46 UTC