W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > March 2002

Re: versioning...

From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:03:45 -0500
Message-Id: <200203051803.NAA03027@tux.w3.org>
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>, "'stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie'" <stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie>, www-xkms@w3.org
On Tuesday 05 March 2002 12:46, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> The argument goes:
> Using URIs as version identifiers does not provide sufficient information
> to an application. In particular there is no ordering defined on URIs.
> So it is not possible to use the URI alone to obtain the information one
> traditionally requires from a version number scheme, i.e.
> Major version of request is higher than that supported
> 	Indicates a protocol incompatibility
> Minor version of request is higher than that supported
> 	Indicates that the request is supported but a software update might
> be advisable.

If this is the case, then it should be defined as such. However I wonder 
how useful automated mechanisms really find this? (I expect not at all.) 
Plus, if you change the syntax or processing the data will have a different 
namespace anyway.

Also, it seems fairly dangerous with respect to a legally binding or 
security type applications. What does "advisable" mean? If you have some 
new bit of a syntax that I don't understand does this mean it's ok if I 
don't comply with it in some way? What if you were expecting it and presume 
the absence of that information means something and changes your behavior 
because of it? There seems to be some implicit criticality implied that I'm 
uncomfortable with.

If someone can present a scenario and definitions of what these things mean 
I might be more comfortable; otherwise it's seems to be optional/advisable 
cruft that's best left out.


Joseph Reagle Jr.                 http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
W3C Policy Analyst                mailto:reagle@w3.org
IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://www.w3.org/Signature/
W3C XML Encryption Chair          http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2002 13:03:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:31:38 UTC