On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Micah
Dubinko<micah.dubinko@m...> wrote:

> #3 may be a non-issue *for HTML*. One reason why this case gets less
> attention is that is no consensus exists that using namespaces as a major
> version number is a best practice (see, for example, the one namespace vs
> three debates from another era of XHTML)
>

Side note: I think there is consensus on this, and the consensus is
that it's a bad idea. Consensus was reached on this, if I recall,
about 10 years ago in the context of XHTML and really hasn't need to
be revisited since.

As long as you're keeping many of the dame elements with the same
meaning a new namespace doesn't help and is usually actively harmful.
Only if you're more or less replacing a language with a completely
different one would a new namespace be appropriate.

-- 
Elliotte Rusty Harold
elharo@i...

_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php