RE: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace URIs

[Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>]

+1

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

"David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com> wrote on 07/14/2005 03:57:18 PM:

> I agree with date stamps in namespace uris.  Minor versions almost
> invariably don't guarantee backwards or forwards compatibility (like xml
> 1.1 to xml 1.0).
> 
> If a compatible change is done, then I think the TC should be able to
> keep the same namespace URI.  The RDDL doc at the ns URI can show the
> version history.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@datapower.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 12:46 PM
> > To: Gilbert Pilz
> > Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: XML Namespace URIs
> > 
> > >  Chris indicated to the editors earlier that he preferred to
> > > use a date stamp to indicate version. You'll have to ask him about
> his
> > > reasons for this preference. I don't care one way or another.
> > 
> > I care.  Date-based version numbers have no explicit interop
> semantics.
> > There's a long history of major/minor semantics.  Cf SAML 1.0, 1.1,
> and
> > 2.0
> > 
> >         /r$
> > 
> > --
> > Rich Salz                  Chief Security Architect
> > DataPower Technology       http://www.datapower.com
> > XS40 XML Security Gateway  http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
>