emix — archive

[Anne Hendry]

Hi Jeremy, Yes, I think using the built-in attribute is very straightforward and easy to maintain. The aspect of using minor/major version numbers that has the most draw for me is that the format has recognizable meaning since it is used in most software versioning which should be familiar to people working with the standard schemas. You can tell right away if you are looking at a major version (3.0) which may break compatibility, or a minor version that has a stable base (2.3.1). How often have you made decisions on what to download just looking at those numbers? I know I do that all the time. The recognition is instantaneous. You can make decisions based on that immediate understanding. It makes it easier, and more clear, for our eventual implementors and for end users as well. No need to delve into the release first -- there is some immediate intelligence in the format and meaning of the numbers that is well understood in the software world. I also believe that it would make it easier to automate checking (say in a tool or an application) on whether you are looking at a backward-compatible version or not. -Anne Jeremy Roberts wrote, On 4/4/2011 7:06 AM: > Hello, Anne: > > I think this is a great idea. I always hate invoking hindsight in a > bandage manner; this is forward thinking. The "version" attribute isa > part of "xs:schema" so I think we should use it (it's free and easy). > > Cheers, > - Jeremy > > > >