Re: XML Schema versioning in 4310bis

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:29:40PM -0500, James Gould wrote:
> Bernie,
> 
> We have considered this in prior discussions on the list.  The consensus was
> to keep backward compatibility by keeping the version number the same.  The
> updated draft is additive to the original RFC, so according to the AD this
> was an acceptable approach.

As a matter of procedure, I think it's important to be careful with
that word "consensus".  There's no working group here, and no chair to
declare consensus.  I'm not at all sure there was consensus: that was
my objection, too, but I said that as a party who didn't have to live
with the results I wouldn't press to hard on this issue.  I still
think it's a serious problem: if we're not going to use the version
number to be the indicator of the version of the specification, what's
it for?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[email protected]
Shinkuro, Inc.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
List run by majordomo software.  For (Un-)subscription and similar details
send "help" to [email protected]