• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>,Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 12:35:56 -0500

To be sure this is clear, the intent is for a change 
that includes only the Blueberry requirements and 
would not open up a major version (eg, 1.1) change? 
So the notion that other fixes could be included 
(eg, tighter coupling to the namespace requirement) 
would not be part of this effort?  Yes to both of 
those questions with some assurance that this will 
not change opportunistically would add to the comfort 
level.

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: John Cowan [mailto:jcowan@r...]

 > (This could perhaps be partially averted by naming Blueberry, XML
 > 1.0.1. 

That was indeed my original name: the connotation of "1.0.1" is
"a very small change" which is indeed the idea.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Closing Blueberry
• Next by Date: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Previous by thread: Non-XML Solutions (RE: Closing Blueberry)
• Next by thread: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread