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

["Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>]

Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> 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.
> 
>  ...
> 
> 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.

The question regarding W3C policy seems to hinge on "is this change a 
new feature?"

I find the answer to that question to be a very simple YES, whatever the 
specific proposal's merits or failings.

I haven't had faith in the W3C's process for a very long time, but this 
kind of hair-splitting seems counterproductive at best.  It seems 
extremely clear that both supporters and opponents of the proposal 
regard it as indeed something new.

Thanks,
Simon St.Laurent
Retiring XML troublemaker
http://simonstl.com/