XML 1.0 third edition versus fifth

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 11:15 AM 4/22/2009 -0600, Robert Orosz wrote:
>BTW, the first bullet in [3] below mentions XML 1.0 3rd Edition.  XML 1.0 is
>now at 5th Edition.

Ah, the perennial question:  upgrade to latest Edition in references?

Usually it is harmless.  But I seem to recall there having been controversy 
in the XML community about whether some stuff proposed for these later 
"editions" of 1.0 were really just errata corrections, or on the other hand 
were changes of functionality.

The key question:  does it (5th versus 3rd) impose any significant changed 
conformance requirements on WebCGM, that we should care about?  (Be aware 
that WebCGM already automatically tracks the latest version of Unicode.)

See for example the third paragraph here:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/#status

Volunteer?  Does someone want to assess whether upgrading to 5th edition is 
"safe" for WebCGM?

(This, btw, is probably not a technical change if we do it, so we can do it 
at 2nd LCWD or later.)

-Lofton.