gtr at ast.cam.ac.uk
Thu Jul 2 11:04:11 PDT 2009
On 2 Jul 2009, at 18:56, Matthew Graham wrote:
> There is no change from Strasbourg: the integer progression is
> required for versions which are not compatible. Namespaces change
> between versions and so a client for one version cannot
> automatically be used for the next version as the namespace of the
> XML message would be incorrect ergo the version integer has to
> change to reflect this.
> It was a major concession to get VOSpace 1.1 remain that and not get
> called VOSpace 2.0.
Well VOSpace 1.1, as it came out, should have been v2 under these
rules and we would have numbered it so if we'd had more notice.
I think I agree with Doug's interpretation here. The various issues of
the standard for WD, PR, .. are VOSpace-2.0-20090801,
VOSpace-2.0-20090901 etc. or whatever dates transpire. And maybe the
namespace URI for the final schema out to have the date in it, too.
I vote for rejecting this change until the exec clarifies the intent.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the semantics