RE: Mechanism, not policy [was: Attribute uniqueness...]

From: keshlam@us.ibm.com [mailto:keshlam@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2000 12:16 PM
> 
> I hate to say it but that's an occupational hazard of 
> publishing a hardcopy
> book on something that's evolving as quickly as XML. Errata 
> are going to
> appear in the specs, and will have to be reflected into 
> documents and code
> based on those specs.

Evolution I have no problem with.  Every word that I wrote about things like
XLink or XPointer could be made obsolete by changes to those specs, and I
wouldn't have a problem with it.

But this isn't an "erratum" to XML Namespaces that we're talking about.
(Nor a simple editing fix, despite the word "typo" that keeps floating
around.)  There is a fundamental philosophical shift going on, where the W3C
published a recommendation, with a specific purpose, and now may be deciding
to retroactively change that purpose, despite the 18 months of use that the
Rec has gone through.

Received on Thursday, 8 June 2000 12:43:51 UTC