• To: "'ht@c...'" <ht@c...>, Dare Obasanjo <kpako@y...>
• Subject: RE: Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation, and Schema V ersioning
• From: Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@f...>
• Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 14:47:10 -0400
• Cc: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>, jeni@j..., xml-dev@l..., "Duane Krahn (E-mail)" <duane.krahn@i...>, "Satish Ramanathan (E-mail)" <Satish.Ramanathan@m...>, "Andrew Warren (E-mail)" <awarren@o...>, "Kurt A Kanaskie (Kurt) (E-mail)" <kkanaskie@l...>, Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@f...>, "Michael Rowell (E-mail)" <mrowell@o...>

Simple expansions to the markup would be backward compatible. What others
come to mind?

And on another related tack, what role does backward compatibility play in
an interchange environment? It would seem that interchange partners would
have to be at the same revision level to safely interchange markup. Backward
compatibility would allow for the older markup to be processed in a setting
supporting newer markup, but the return trip would at risk for breakage (not
necessarily in all circumstances, though).

Since my situation involves interchange, it would seem that, unless the
markup was at a particular, mutually supported version, special measures
would have to be taken to ensure a viable interaction. 

What role, if any, should the namespace name play in this scenario?

Mark


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	ht@c... [mailto:ht@c...] 
Sent:	Thursday, July 18, 2002 12:46 PM
To:	Dare Obasanjo
Cc:	David Carlisle; jeni@j...; xml-dev@l...
Subject:	Re:  Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation, and
Schema V   ersioning


I don't _think_ it's policy -- I believe backward incompatible changes
should involve a namespace change.

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Base (RE: Article: Keeping pace with James Clark)
• Next by Date: RE: Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation, and Schema V ersioning
• Previous by thread: Re: Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation, and Schema V ersioning
• Next by thread: RE: Schema Namespace name, schemaLocation, and Schema V ersioning
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread