- From: Joe Kesselman (the address IS real) <keshlam-nospam@comcast.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:38:55 -0500
- To: xml-editor@w3.org
It seems we've gotten out of the habit of including a rationalle section for errata entries. May I suggest that someone go back and add one to E09 and later? While the intended effect is clear, I'm sometimes having real trouble understanding why a change is considered an erratum worthy of being patched back into XML 1.0, at the risk of confusing incompatability with existing 1.0 processors, rather than a new feature that belongs in 1.1 (or perhaps 1.05, if folks aren't ready to move all the way to 1.1). A formal rationalle might go a long way toward helping us understand the reasoning behind that decision. The absence of one makes this reader nervous about whether a change is well justified. Thanks for considering this... -- () ASCII Ribbon Campaign | Joe Kesselman /\ Stamp out HTML e-mail! | System architexture and kinetic poetry
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2008 05:39:33 UTC