Re: SYMM WG comments on XBase 2nd last call

On Thu, Jul 06, 2000 at 09:57:47AM -0700, Cohen, Aaron M wrote:
> Echoing my opinion on another thread, we don't have the cycles to create an
> enhanced XBase with multiple bases. It would be nice, but it is obviously a
> new feature and we don't have time for new features.

  Concur, we just discussed this point during today's XML Linking telcon
and we decided to not try to support multiple base, mostly on the point
of added complexity, which we found hard to justify.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-linking-wg/2000Jul/0002.html

> Everyone repeat after me: "No new features!".

  "No new features!"

> I suggest that we say nothing for now. If XBase becomes a rec before SMIL
> Boston, then it is easy to add a sentence to the language profile that says
> that "the SMIL language is XML, and XML supports XBase, therefore SMIL does
> too". If not, then it won't.

  Sounds perfect to me. I hope the issue is closed, the plan is clear.

Daniel

-- 
Daniel.Veillard@w3.org | W3C, INRIA Rhone-Alpes  | Today's Bookmarks :
Tel : +33 476 615 257  | 655, avenue de l'Europe | Linux XML libxml WWW
Fax : +33 476 615 207  | 38330 Montbonnot FRANCE | Gnome rpm2html rpmfind
 http://www.w3.org/People/all#veillard%40w3.org  | RPM badminton Kaffe

Received on Thursday, 6 July 2000 14:13:35 UTC