Re: XML Blueberry

[Jeff Rafter <jeffrafter@earthlink.net>]

John Cowan scripsit:

> Well, yes, but there is IMHO (the Core WG may not agree) a need
> for backward compatibility: you should be able to take a random
> 1.0 document, mark it Blueberry, and it should still work.
> Consequently, I don't want to confuse the issue by posting my
> whole proposed algorithm, especially since it is not in ANY WAY
> approved by the Core WG at present.  But here's an outline of it:

This actually frightens me though I think it is a Good Thing.  If this is
the case, there are A LOT of XML users who will just add the Blueberry mark
to be able to state that their documents use the latest and greatest XML--
perhaps as a  marketing effort.  It is something like this that makes the
ultimate impact much larger-- whereas if the mark were reserved only for
documents using Blueberry features it would be reasonable that people using
those documents would be a much smaller subsection of the current XML user
base (based on current discussion only).  Therefore the amount of users
"forced" into upgrading to Blueberry enabled software is much smaller.
Maybe this can't be avoided either way-- I am just trying to consider ways
to minimize the overall impact-- which I am sure the Core WG has already
thought of.

Thanks,
Jeff Rafter
Defined Systems
http://www.defined.net
XML Development and Developer Web Hosting