Re: Policy on backwards incompatible changes

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ "Keith Fahlgren" <abdelazer@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk> wrote:
|> Keith Fahlgren wrote:
|>
|>> What is the community's feeling of the cause of the concern over
|>> incompatible changes?
|>
|> A fairly long established principle that you don't mess up
|> installations more than you have to?
|
| Understood, but 2008 is a much different world the one in which you're
| describing ("long established") & the one in which these standards
| processes were developed. I think it's an understanding of that shift
| that prompted Norm's initial post:
|
| """
| It was suggested at the last telcon that perhaps these rules are too
| strict for the internet age.
| """

Yes, but on the other side, there are established organizations with
huge amounts of legacy DocBook content that don't move at internet
speed. It would be rude, to say the least, if we moved so fast that
they didn't have an opportunity to upgrade in an organized manner.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | O for a Muse of fire, that would
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | ascend / The brightest heaven of
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | invention, / A kingdom for a
                                   | stage, princes to act / And
                                   | monarchs to behold the swelling
                                   | scene!--William Shakespeare, Henry
                                   | V

PGP signature