• From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
• To: <noah_mendelsohn@u...>, "'Len Bullard'" <len.bullard@u...>
• Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 20:52:06 -0600

That is clarifying.

Standards for data set descriptions need operation sets if versioning
extends to semantics.  However one achieves that is a tools issue.

Thanks.

len

From: noah_mendelsohn@u... [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@u...] 
 
Len Bullard writes:

> Please elaborate on the shades of gray.

... all I meant by "shades of gray" is that compatibility is in that sense 
a matter of degree.  Some language that provide for extension content also 
provide default interpretations for that content.  Furthermore, many 
applications that accept extensible languages as input have default rules 
for processing or manipulating that extension content.  

<snip />

Anyway, if I were another reader of this list I'd probably be anxious to 
see this bit of the exchange wrap up, so I propose we let it go and give 
others a chance to chime in.  Of course, I'll be glad to keep going if 
that's for the best.  Thanks.

Noah

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007Jun/0092

• References:
  • RE: Fwd: Data versioning strategy: address semantic, re lationship, and syntactic changes?
    • From: noah_mendelsohn@u...