Re: [xri] namespace URI versioning policy

[Breno de Medeiros <breno@google.com>]

I agree that the current policy is inflexible. It was meant to allow
for reference by other standards, not to help with references for
implementations (either way, backward incompatible changes will break
implementations).

AFAIK, no spec is referring to the earlier version of the draft.

On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Eran Hammer-Lahav <eran@hueniverse.com> wrote:
> No. My point was that the deployed code has already changed to the latest draft with the same namespace. Anyone implementing XRD at this stage is well aware it can change. It is only with the next draft that I plan to tell people to consider it finished.
>
> EHL
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Scott Cantor [mailto:cantor.2@osu.edu]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 7:14 AM
>> To: Eran Hammer-Lahav; 'Will Norris'; 'XRI TC'
>> Subject: RE: [xri] namespace URI versioning policy
>>
>> Eran Hammer-Lahav wrote on 2009-12-23:
>> > Let's not and change the TC rules if needed. It is against the
>> expectations
>> > of deployed software.
>>
>> Well, it's for deployed software that the rule exists. If people have
>> meaningful code using the old namespace it pretty much has to change.
>>
>> It wouldn't have been my expectation that there was such code, of course,
>> nor do I personally care much about code written pre-standard, but that's
>> why the policy existed.
>>
>> -- Scott
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>



-- 
--Breno

+1 (650) 214-1007 desk
+1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
MTV-41-3 : 383-A
PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)