Re: [xml-dev] Ten Years Later - XML 1.0 Fifth Edition?

[ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson)]

Elliotte Harold writes:

> . . . then this should be
> addressed in a new version of XML rather than by abusing the W3C
> errata process.

The W3C errata process [1] defines three kinds of change which can be
published in a new edition:

 1) No changes to text content
 2) Corrections that do not affect conformance
    Editorial changes or clarifications that do not change the
    technical content of the specification.
 3) Corrections that MAY affect conformance, but add no new features
    These changes MAY affect conformance to the Recommendation.

  For the third class of change, W3C requires:
     1. Review by the community to ensure the technical soundness of
        proposed corrections.
     2. Timely publication of the edited Recommendation, with
        corrections incorporated.

Seems to me the proposed name-character inventory change falls
squarely in category 3.  I appreciate that you may dislike this change
on technical and/or policy grounds, but to claim that it violates W3C
process is misleading at best.

ht

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#errata
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]